Handwriting on the Walls: Fairfield City Schools Caught in Yet Another Lie in the Emilie Olsen Case

The handwriting was on the walls for Fairfield City Schools in the Emilie Olsen case in the days and hours before and after her death on December 11, 2014.  Literally.

We'll prove that.  We'll also prove yet again that Fairfield City Schools LIED in it's official federal court filing response to the Emilie Olsen case.

When will Fairfield finally just start to tell the truth?  Or hire better liars.  It really is sad and pathetic that Fairfield is incapable of being honest.  And when one considers that the evidence we used to catch the district in yet another lie about Emilie's case is widely available in public records, it is puzzling Fairfield would even be dishonest anyway.  What is it with these people?

In the federal lawsuit filed against Fairfield City Schools, it's employees privately, and several students, it was alleged that graffiti existed in the middle school that was derogatory and possibly racist towards Emilie Olsen .  We have published an image of this allegation in the Olsen lawsuit below.

This allegation by the Olsen family regarding hateful graffiti on the walls of Fairfield Middle School was denied in the district's official response filed in federal court early this year.  You can read more about that here.  In fact, every allegation - literally every last one in the 100+ page filing by the Olsens - was denied by Fairfield City Schools.

In April 2016, our group submitted a records request to Fairfield City Schools to try to get to the bottom of these graffiti allegations involving Emilie.  Our reasoning was that if the graffiti did exist, then a paper trail of maintenance requests might have led to it's removal.  We were told by the district that no such records existed, and have posted that e-mail exchange below.

Like everything else involving Fairfield City Schools when it comes to Emilie Olsen, the district is lying again.  Plain and simple, they're LIARS.  We'll prove it.

Check out this e-mail from the day after Emilie Olsen died, between her science teacher and Fairfield Middle School Assistant Principal Mark Rice (For more on Mr. Rice's dirty hands in Emilie's case, please click here).  As you can clearly see, this December 12, 2014 e-mail, sent at 11:46 AM that morning, clearly indicates that graffiti about Emilie Olsen did decorate the bathroom walls at FMS.

So, we have proof that administration at Fairfield City Schools was notified that yes, indeed there was graffiti about Emilie Olsen in FMS around the time of her death.  Kind of makes Fairfield's denials about the graffiti in their response to the Olsen lawsuit look like a sickening and ridiculous pack of lies, doesn't it?  That's because it is.

What did Mark Rice do with this information in the e-mail above?  We don't know.

We have his e-mails and those of other administrators and the Superintendent, and can verify that this note from Emilie's science teacher was never forwarded to anyone by Mr. Rice.  Nor is any mention of graffiti mentioned in the Fairfield Township Police Report.

Why, Mark Rice?  What did you do with the information given to you in that e-mail?

Fairfield City Schools' lies go deeper than that however.  Not only do records exist in the form of e-mails proving that the the district was made aware of the racist, bullying graffiti about Emilie Olsen at Fairfield Middle School, but we have reason to believe the district has actual images of the writings themselves.

Check out these e-mails sent by an unknown party to Fairfield Middle School Principal Lincoln Butts on December 17, 2014.  The images depicted in the boys and girls restrooms at FMS are redacted because they contain student names.  Note the last of the images contains the date Emilie died, "12-11-14."  We'll give you three guesses to figure out the student name redacted in these pictures.

Notice in this e-mail also sent on December 17, 2014, that some kind of unknown graffiti also existed in Cafeteria C.  That's the cafeteria Emilie ate in.  That's the cafeteria where the October 21st, 2014 bullying incident we have spoken about before unfolded.  One guess as to whose name is under this redaction:

We're no attorneys or legal experts by any means.  But it seems like in the civil case filed against them by Emilie Olsen's estate, Fairfield City Schools has been caught in yet another whopper of a lie.

What did Mr.Butts do with the information in these e-mails?  Again, we can find no e-mail evidence these images were ever forwarded to his superiors or police.  Why?  What was done?

These documents that prove the existence of the graffiti about Emilie, and establishes that proof of the same was in Fairfield's possession from just hours after she died.   The first e-mail to an FMS administrator was sent the morning after Emilie died.

Judging from the official police report into the incident, it appears Fairfield employees never bothered to inform law enforcement about the graffiti regarding Emilie that the school knew existed.  If that isn't obstruction of justice, then it ought to be.  It should be illegal in some from or fashion what employees at Fairfield City Schools have done here.

And frankly, how dumb does one have to be to deny in federal court the existence of graffiti that is openly documented in public records available to anyone who bothers to request them and look for it?  If some irrelevant internet watchdog activist group was able to piece all this together, Fairfield, what is a real lawyer, or even state and federal investigators going to do?  We wouldn't want to be in the legal position of Fairfield City Schools right about now.

Fairfield lied and Emilie died.  The handwriting is on the walls as to Fairfield's guilt.

#JusticeforEmilie

Lots of Talking Going on at Fairfield Behind that Wall of Student Privacy Laws

To use the words of a certain official at Fairfield City Schools, when it comes to exposing your conduct during the Emilie Olsen case, it would be a mistake to say "We're done with you!"

We will be presenting for your review an e-mail exchange from May 2015 between two district employees regarding the Emilie Olsen case.  The level of dishonesty contained in the e-mail is shocking, and we will provide you with the proof as to why.  We have some serious concerns about the content of this e-mail, as well as the untrue statements being issued by the district's spokesperson.

The e-mail exchange in question, posted below, was likely prompted by the public outcry that accompanied the May 2015 WCPO -I-Team investigation into Emilie Olsen's case.  You can view that report here.

As many of you probably recall, when the I-Team reported about Emilie's case, there was shock across the entire Tri-State.  Despite their statements to contrary, Fairfield City Schools in fact was fully aware of the fact Emilie was being bullied.  WCPO had the documents to prove it.

After the I-Team report hit the airwaves, Fairfield City Schools was roundly criticized.  The district was inundated with negative publicity and scorn from all quarters.  There were even angry outbursts at a Board of Education meeting.  And yet all Fairfield did in the face of a firestorm of criticism was issue canned statements and cite student privacy laws.  In the minds of many people, this made the district appear all the more guilty; and compelled unquestioning Fairfield supporters to demand a response.

Now that you have an understanding of the context about surrounding events, please read for yourself the May 16, 2015 e-mail exchange between Fairfield City Schools Public Relations Director Gina Gentry-Fletcher and Instructional Specialist Lori Wegman:

While the e-mail may seem innocent enough at first glance, we're going to prove that there's enough baloney in Gina Gentry-Fletcher's response to open a deli.  We'll start at the beginning of Ms. Gentry-Fletcher's response, and dismantle it, point by point.

Ms. Gentry-Fletcher states "We had one report of bullying from her dad prior to the start of the school year from when she attended FIS..."

That's a LIE.  And Gina Gentry-Fletcher knows it.  Here's the proof:

This was an e-mail exchange between Marc Olsen and Fairfield Middle School Assistant Principal Mark Rice from September 8, 2014.  As you can see, it was forwarded by Mr. Rice to Gina Gentry-Fletcher on December 15 , 2014.  We have the original e-mail, which was also sent to FMS Guidance Counselor Erica Green, if anyone is interested in seeing it.

As you can see for yourself in the e-mail above, Mr.Olsen clearly identifies a particular student in a specific classroom at FMS in September 2014 that was harassing Emilie Olsen.  In other words, bullying.

So how can Ms. Gentry-Fletcher claim that the school was never notified of any bullying of Emilie at FMS during the 2014-2015 academic year, when she herself was copied on an e-mail indicating specific harassment that was taking place?  Why was Ms. Gentry-Fletcher discussing intimate particulars of Emilie's case with Ms. Wegman anyway?

More importantly, what was done by Assistant Principal Mark Rice to address this harassment Mr.Olsen identified specifically?  Was the bullying policy adhered to?  Was the building administrator or the Superintendent's office notified of the bullying, as district policy demands?  We can't find proof of it.

Moving on...

Further in her May 2015 e-mail to Lori Wegman, Ms. Gentry-Fletcher states "The incident ch9 referred to in October did not involve __ ([sic] Emilie).  The reporter insists that she is one of the students who completed an incident report but she is not."

That's just not true.

First off, as anyone who watched the I-Team story can see, at no time did reporters claim Emilie herself wrote any of the eyewitness statements regarding an October 21st, 2014 bullying incident in the cafeteria at Fairfield Middle School.  The I-Team simply published the documents and identified Emilie as the target of that bullying incident.

Additionally, in subsequent e-mails with reporters, district officials have claimed that the October 21st incident being referenced had nothing to do with Emilie.  That's just not the case.

We've published these documents before, but must do so again.  These are the eyewitness statemnets to the October 21st, 2014 cafeteria incident at Fairfield Middle School.  As you can see for yourself in the first image below, it says as plain as day, "File under Emilie Olsen."  Look:

And as you can also clearly see in the eyewitness statement above, Emilie Olsen was specifically named as being the target of bullies then and there, at the FMS cafeteria on October 21, 2014.  How can anyone who isn't a liar or not very bright claim the October 21st incident described in these eyewitness statements did not involve her?

Please read the rest of the eyewitness reports for that day as well.  The statements clearly describe a bullying event where Emilie's friends attempted to come to her rescue because of harassment actively taking place then and there at FMS on October 21st, 2014.  Not the previous academic year at the Intermediate building.

This e-mail exchange between district employees - even if we had not conclusively proven it to be a pack of complete lies - raises some very troubling questions about Fairfield City Schools.

Why is the Public Relations Director speaking about the Emilie Olsen case at all with a frontline staff member?  Why is Fairfield speaking about private details of Emilie's case with district employees, while cowering behind student privacy laws to the public?  Has FERPA - the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act - been violated?

We'll wait with bated breath for an explanation from Fairfield City Schools.  But there are other questions that need asking too:

Have student privacy laws been violated here?   Has professional misconduct taken place under Ohio Department of Education regulations?  Is this e-mail one more example in a long pattern of abuses and misconduct by Fairfield City Schools?  Does this e-mail only provide further proof of a pattern of conduct by Fairfield City Schools that resulted in Emilie Olsen being deprived of her civil rights under federal law?

We think so.  What do you think?

We'll be sending all of this information along to state education officials in Columbus, and you can rest assured it will get into the hands of federal investigators at the Justice and Education Departments.  Fairfield City Schools can just explain all this to the proper officials.  Because they lack the integrity to come clean with this community.  You can bet on that.

#JusticeforEmilie

Another Certified Fairfield City School District LIE

You don't need a flashy graphic or the obligatory ominous music cable news channels employ when announcing breaking news to understand that Fairfield City Schools is a dishonest organization.  Fairfield City Schools lied, and poor Emilie Olsen died.

The fact Fairfield City Schools has engaged in a long pattern of dishonesty and outright lies about the Emilie Olsen case is beyond question.  We have proven beyond all doubt that the school district is incapable of being truthful on the subject of Emilie.

The question is, who particularly at the district is or was generating these lies?  We still don't know, but we're here to present an example of some of the lies the district told itself in the days after Emilie Olsen died.

Check out this December 16, 2014 e-mail from Fairfield City Schools Public Relations Director Gina Gentry-Fletcher to the Superintendent, Board of Education, and other district officials:

As you can read for yourself, Ms. Gentry-Fletcher informed district leaders that no evidence indicated Emilie Olsen was bullied, police investigated her case twice, no bullies were named, the Middle School principal only coincidentally visited the Olsen home with police to return locker belongings, and the school resource officer was continuing to investigate.

None of that is true.  Not a single, solitary word of it.

Let's be clear here.  Just because what district spokesperson Gina Gentry-Fletcher said was not true, does not mean she is personally engaging in dishonesty.  Perhaps she was fed bad information by someone.  We have no idea who that would be.  But you might have your own opinions on that subject.

Regardless of where the dishonesty was generated, what was being relayed to district leaders in this e-mail was not true.  And we'll prove it in five easy points.

1.  In her e-mail to district leaders, Ms.Gentry-Fletcher states the police investigation was done twice.

Nowhere in the police report, and in no media outlets was it ever reported that the police investigation was conducted twice.  In fact, no one anywhere has ever claimed that, except in this e-mail we've posted.

Why?  Where did the idea the investigation was conducted twice come from?  We'd like to know.  More importantly, so would a federal court.

We have spoken offline to some of the people interviewed by police in the investigation.  None of the people interviewed, save one, were spoken with by police on more than one occasion.  Nowhere in the police report was it mentioned that multiple interviews were conducted with every single person contacted.

2.  In her e-mail to district leaders, Ms.Gentry-Fletcher stated that there was no evidence Emilie Olsen was bullied.

Again, this is not true.  Not by a long shot.

This is not to say that Ms.Gentry-Fletcher knew what she was telling district leaders was not true.  In fact, we believe she and many other district officials had no idea about the bullying Emilie endured over two years at Fairfield.

The question is, why was Emilie's bullying kept a secret, and who covered it up?  A federal court will find out, if this group doesn't do it first.  There is a paper trail on this, Fairfield City Schools.  It's just a matter of time before someone pieces it all together.

The e-mails between Emilie's parents and school officials prove that she was bullied, and that numerous people at Fairfield City Schools knew about it.  The incident report below from October 21st, 2014 at Fairfield Middle School proves it.  See for yourself.

Above are the eyewitness reports submitted regarding an October 21st, 2014 incident in the cafeteria where Emilie Olsen was the target of bullying.  We know for a fact that at least one administrator at Fairfield Middle School knew about this incident.  Assistant Principal Mark Rice is identified by name in the documents, and was the school employee that sent those students involved in the incident to the office.  The question is, who at the office took these statements, and was also aware of this incident?

There was also a long line of e-mails to administrators at two Fairfield buildings which proved that the district was informed by Emilie's parents about the harassment she was enduring.  See for yourself e-mails which prove bullying occurred and the school knew about it:

3. & 4.  In her e-mail to district leaders, Ms.Gentry-Fletcher stated that no bullies were identified or named by Emilie's friends who spoke with police.  District leaders were also advised that Mr. Butts was simply at the Olsen home that December 16, 2014 to return the belongings of Emilie's locker.  In this e-mail by the district spokesperson, and in later e-mails and statements to the public, the nature of Mr. Butts visit with police to the Olsen home was described as coincidental.

That's just not true, according to the excerpt below from the Fairfield Township Police Report:

 

As you can see for yourself, a specific alleged bully was named, but his or her name was redacted by our group.  Moreover, nowhere are locker articles mentioned by the police in their report.  Perhaps some of Emilie's items were brought home, but it is obvious that the simultaneous arrival of Mr. Butts and police at the Olsen home was no coincidence.

As we have stated before at length in a previous blog entry, what Fairfield City Schools wants us to believe is that one of it's administrators and law enforcement were together at 10:30 AM for a span of time, and then all arrived at the same location 90 minutes later, and it was all just a happy coincidence. Neither party knew the other would end up at the Olsen home that day, December 16th, 2014, when both police and Mr.Butts were together an hour beforehand?

5.   In her e-mail to district leaders, Ms.Gentry-Fletcher stated that the school resource officer at FMS would continue investigating the case.  If this did take place, why didn't the officer - or anyone for that matter - inform the public of the findings of this wider investigation?  Where is the report?  Where is the investigation?  Show us.  Where were it's findings revealed?

We want to emphasize again that we have no evidence Ms.Gentry-Fletcher was engaging in a purposeful effort to mislead district leaders in her e-mail above from December 16, 2014.

All the same however, as we have demonstrated, her statements to leaders at Fairfield City Schools proved to be untrue.  Why?  How did this happen

Was the district spokesperson given bad information?  If so, by whom?  Where is the accountability at Fairfield City Schools?

Regardless of who uttered the first falsehood, or who may have also been duped by false statements other district employees might have uttered, the bottom line is, Fairfield City Schools lied, and Emilie Olsen died.  The district has yet to own up or admit to this deception of the public.  How can we trust these people?

Screw the Taxpayer and Even Their Own District Employees: "The Fairfield Way"

In researching for this blog entry, we have observed multiple instances in which district employees and officials at various levels have spoken of "The Fairfield Way."  We've come to the conclusion that "The Fairfield Way" exemplifies everything actually wrong with the school district.

"The Fairfield Way" was on full display in the fake, fixed, faux job search for the district's next superintendent.  Deceit and a contemptible loathing for public input - and even the comments and wishes of their own district employees - all combined to taint the recent hiring process for Fairfield City Schools' next leader.

Fairfield City Schools was not honest and transparent with the public or even it's own employees while conducting a sham search for the next Superintendent.  As usual, Fairfield has demonstrated why it is a district that has no desire to listen to one word from the public about anything.  This is a school district in denial, and has exhibited once again why it simply cannot be trusted.  We'll show you why we believe this by sharing a series of e-mails and documents.

The story of how Fairfield City Schools came to have a new Superintendent through a tainted process began when Paul Otten handed in resignation notice on April 5th. You can read more on that story here.

Ostensibly, it looked like a new day was dawning for Fairfield City Schools. Perhaps a new face would be arriving in our district to unify our community and bring about the necessary change and healing we so badly need after the Emilie Olsen scandal that has rocked the school system and placed Fairfield in the negative spotlight of international news. Even this April 22nd posting on the district's Facebook page made it sound like the search for a new school leader was a wide open process that would gather up and consider community input until the Board of Education was able to make a superb selection in a large field of qualified candidates from inside and outside the district:

Behind the scenes however, the outcome of the job search was everything but pre-determined, even as the services of consultant Bill Sears were retained for $1000 on April 14th:

Fairfield City Schools could have saved itself the effort of spouting worthless lip service, Mr. Sears the trouble of his good work, and the taxpayers' money.  It was clear from the onset of the job search that it would be a strictly internal process, open only to employees already on the payroll at Fairfield, according to this April 14th e-mail:

We know for a fact that the job search was only open to internal candidates, and that only two people even applied, according to this recently uncovered e-mail from Board President Dan Hare:

We also know the names of all Fairfield employees who applied the Superintendent's position.  The massive field of two candidates included Assistant Superintendent Roger Martin, and the eventual winner, High School Principal Billy Smith.  If you would like to see their applications, please contact us and we will send it along.

Unlike Fairfield City Schools, it is clear that the consultant hired to lead the search, Bill Sears, was trying to act with professionalism and integrity to get Fairfield the best Superintendent possible.  The school district had it's own agenda and threw away Mr. Sears' talents and experience.  We don't understand why.

Further proof that Fairfield City Schools had an agenda all it's own when they began the job search for a new Superintendent can be seen in this April 19th e-mail from Mr. Hare, where he lists the steps that need to be taken.  Focus groups were supposed to be a prominent feature of the hiring process.  Take a close look and see where community input from taxpayers and parents ranked in the pecking order:

As you can see, your thoughts, wishes, and input about the new Superintendent ranked dead last.  Your thoughts were the last to be considered.  Once again, the district's contempt for you is palpable.

The leadership and Board of Education gave the community a huge middle finger in the hiring process for a new Superintendent.    But don't feel too badly.  The district used their other middle finger to shove into the faces of it's own administrators, teachers, and other employees.

Several focus groups were formed among different work groups at Fairfield City Schools to gather ideas on what the ideal Superintendent would look like.  If you would like to review these brainstorming session results, please contact us and we'll send it along.

In the focus group involving building administrators, one of their top requests for a new district leader included a wide range of experience in dealing with multiple student age groups.  Building administrators also wanted a Superintendent with experience in many different areas of district affairs, such as curriculum or A.P..  Employees in the focus group from district offices requested that the new Superintendent possess "multiple years of admin experience in a school district."

Here are the qualifications for the new Superintendent of Fairfield City Schools, according to his own application:

This group cannot find any mention of multiple years of administrative experience at the district level, or involvement with curriculum or A.P..  In other words, the Board of Education ignored it's own employees as much as the taxpayer.  At least the district leadership was fair about it.  They don't care what anybody thinks.  Period.  No exceptions.

The manner in which Fairfield City Schools deceived the public into believing our voice carried weight in the Superintendent hiring process really is scandalous.

A public meeting to gather public input on what Fairfield residents wanted in a new Superintendent was held May 5th, according to this Journal-News story.  The consensus view of the meeting appeared to be that an outsider, with fresh eyes, was what Fairfield needed in a new leader.

There were even community members who wrote the Board and Mr. Sears urging them to hire an outside candidate for the job, such as this citizen:

To his credit, Mr. Sears was prepared to give the community a wide field of exceptionally qualified candidates.  The slideshow he presented to the Board and community indicated he desired to present to the Board nine to twelve candidates to pick from.

The Board of Education simply did what it wanted to, and said to hell with you, the taxpayer, district parents, and even their own employees.  We feel this hiring process for the new Superintendent was not transparent or honest.  The selection lacks legitimacy because of doubts about the process.

At no point have we found a single e-mail or document to indicate that any consideration was ever given to posting the vacant superintendent's position externally.  If you don't believe us, send us an email at shameonfcsd@gmail.com and we'll turn over every document we have on the matter for your inspection.  Unlike this school district, we have nothing to hide.  

Fairfield City Schools is so conceited and presumptuous that it thinks the best qualified candidate to be your community's superintendent of schools could only be found on it's own existing payroll.  Nobody else in the field of public education anywhere in the United States and it's 14,000 or so school districts could possibly be up to snuff or match the qualities of any of the whopping field of two internal candidates who applied to be Fairfield's next school leader.  That's "The Fairfield Way."

Another subject conspicuous by its absence in the 100 pages or so of documents we have about the Superintendent job search is any mention of the Emilie Olsen case or the lifetime of ensuing negative publicity Fairfield City Schools has endured because of it.  Not one person from the Board, to applicant candidates, or any district staff in focus groups mentioned Emilie's case or even hinted at the topic vaguely.

What that tells us is that Fairfield City Schools has not learned anything in Emilie's case.  How else can one account for the fact that the case, and preventing future such tragedies, or even addressing the issue of bullying never came up once in any of the focus groups.  Nor were these topics addressed anywhere by the two job applicants vying to become Superintendent.

The district is tone deaf and doesn't care.  End of story.

Fairfield City Schools appears to not be in touch with reality if no consideration was given to how the new Superintendent might go about cleaning up the mess this district created for itself because of misconduct before and after Emilie's death.  The district is famous worldwide.  Or, infamous, rather.

The school district, Board, staff, and new Superintendent may have no interest in addressing the Emilie Olsen case.  But the rest of the world and a federal court does.

The community here in Fairfield is the loser here.  But so too is Mr. Billy Smith, our new Superintendent.  The process which hired this man was crooked and lacked integrity and transparency.  A large portion of the community will find it difficult to support Mr. Smith in light of the questions which surround his appointment.

Mr. Smith has done nothing wrong here.  He is a victim of circumstances, and the plotting of our school board.  It wasn't Mr. Smith's fault the district lied to our faces and said they'd conduct a thorough search for the best candidate, armed with your input, but then turned around instead and just conducted a sham process.

We have proven your worst fears about the job hunt for Fairfield's new Superintendent to be true.  You now know that the process was a rigged sham.  You were lied to yet again by Fairfield City Schools.  Rather than embracing this opportunity for healing and a new beginning in our community, Fairfield City Schools was too busy pursuing it's own agenda, and have once again shattered any faith the public had in them.

Mr. Smith Goes to Fairfield

As many of you may know, it was announced yesterday that the new Superintendent of Fairfield City Schools will be Mr. Billy Smith.  Mr. Smith is currently the lead principal of Fairfield High School, a post he has held for most of the past 7 years.  You can click on this story from the Journal-News to get more information.

We're sure Mr. Smith is a very nice man personally with all the best intentions in the world.  We think he might even make a good Superintendent of a school district someday.  At a later date.  In a different district.  And we wish him all the luck possible in trying to manage this school district.  Anyone would need it.

While it is not the fault of Mr. Smith; who is simply trying to do the best for himself, his career, and his family as any of us would do; the fact remains the citizens of Fairfield have once again been ignored by the powers that be in our community.

It is obvious Fairfield City Schools has given this community yet another huge middle finger.  

We won't beat around the bush or mince our words one bit.  The Board of Education for Fairfield City Schools does not care what you think.  This process to hire the Superintendent of our school district was dirty, lacked transparency, and was as crooked as the Board of Education that oversaw it.

Yes, you read that correctly.  We'll say it again. 

In their elected capacity as public figures and members of our Board of Education, Jerome Kearns, Balena Shorter, Dan Hare, Michael Berding, and Brian Begley have acted without integrity or transparency during the search for our new Superintendent.  But what else is new?

It is our contention that the fix was in the entire time in regards to the hiring of a new Superintendent.  How else can one conclude otherwise?

Paul Otten handed in resignation notice on April 5th.  You can read more on that story here.

The public meeting to gather public input on what Fairfield residents wanted in a new Superintendent was held May 5th, according to this Journal-News story.  

Mr. Smith was announced as the new Superintendent on June 2.  That meant the entire search process took less than two months from the day Mr. Otten resigned.  The Board only had public input on the topic for 27 days before making a selection.  

We stand by our statement that Fairfield City Schools ignored what the public said in regards what you wanted in a new Superintendent.  Many residents present at the May 5th public input meeting expressed a strong desire for the new leader of our district to come from outside our community.  So what does the Brain Trust of Bach Lane do?

They essentially said 'screw you.  We'll do what we want.  We'll hire an insider.  A crony.  It will be business as usual here at Fairfield City Schools.'

At least our Board was upfront about it's intention to spit in your face one more time.  According to the previously cited article, Board member Michael Berding told the Journal-News last month Fairfield was looking for someone already working for the district “and it would definitely be a positive if someone understands what we are about here in Fairfield."
Yes, Mr. Berding, we all know what Fairfield City Schools is all about.  The past 19 months or so has taught us all that.  The past 29 months has certainly enlightened the Olsen family on what Fairfield is about.

The Board had a pretty good chance at starting to heal this community and unite us all behind a new Superintendent.  We had the chance to change the culture in our district.  But Fairfield threw it all away.  

With their actions, Fairfield City Schools has dug it's stubborn heels in, and pigheadedly declared that it never did anything wrong in Emilie's case.  The district has stated by it's actions that it will continue to carry on behaving in the way that has made them world famous (more like infamous).

Fairfield City Schools has been raked over the coals worldwide over it's grossly negligent misconduct and disgusting antics in the Emilie Olsen case, both before and after her death.  Emilie's story has appeared all over local media.  Fairfield has made national news on both Good Morning America and more recently in the Washington Post.  The injustice doled out to Emilie by this school system has even appeared in international news, like the Daily Mail in the United Kingdom.

Fairfield City Schools has quite the reputation now.  They have only themselves to thank.  Hiring an insider does nothing to change this fitting reputation.

Putting aside the highly questionable process surrounding the hiring of Mr. Smith as the new Superintendent, the qualifications of the man himself raises several red flags, in the opinion of this group and many in our community.  First of all, Mr. Smith has never been a Superintendent before.  He hasn't even been an assistant superintendent.  

Granted, he has led a building of 2400 students.  But that is a far cry from managing an entire school district with 10,000 students and helping to oversee a budget of millions of dollars.  Even the most diehard of unquestioning supporters of the district have to acknowledge that fact.

Fairfield as a school district and as a community does not have the luxury of affording a new superintendent a set of training wheels until he learns the job, and perhaps even blossoms into a superb administrator one day.  This isn't a Summer internship we're talking about here.  It's the chief administrative position for the schools in your community.  There is little margin for error.

In addition to his glaring lack of qualifications to lead one of Ohio's larger public school districts, some incidents that have taken place at Fairfield High School, and the responses to them by Mr. Smith, leave us quite uncomfortable.  

Even as far back as 2010, bullying horror stories about Fairfield City Schools, and the High School particularly, began to surface.  Check out this story from WCPO in 2010 - while Mr. Smith was Principal.

What knowledge did Mr. Smith have about Sara Clark being bullied?  Was it brought to his attention personally?  If so, what actions did Mr. Smith take?  Was the bullying brought to the attention of Mr. Smith's staff?  If so, what actions did they take, and did they inform him, as policy mandates they do?

These are all important questions that need to be asked, and which Mr. Smith needs to answer.  Perhaps Mr. Smith did everything he could to help Sara Clark.  It may be that he followed the district's bullying policy to the letter.  She says otherwise in a lawsuit.  Will the district please set the record straight?

Still, we don't get a good feeling about promoting a man to the job of Superintendent in a district plagued by a bullying scandal, when the district he serves was sued just a few years ago over an alleged bullying problem in the very building he was supposed to be administering. 

Another problem plaguing Fairfield City Schools during the scandal surrounding the Emilie Olsen case has been the lack of transparency by the district and an intolerance for dissent or criticism.  As you can see in this May 21st, 2013 e-mail, Mr. Smith feels you, the parents, citizens, and taxpayers of this community should not be permitted to criticize the district:

 

We're also quite troubled by the role Mr. Smith played in a 2013 incident in which police were summoned and state in their incident report investigation that the victim's allegations had merit.  Read the report for yourself.  It seems to us that Mr. Smith is way out of line here, and as so often happens at Fairfield City Schools, was blaming the victim:

Fairfield High School was also featured prominently in the news in December 2015, and as often is the case for our community, it wasn't in a positive light.  We all probably remember this graphic and disturbing video from an incident within the offices of FHS:

As the video depicts, Mr. Smith was not with these students as the incident unfolded, and that is perfectly fine.  He may well have been attending to other duties.  The building principal cannot be everywhere at once, and no reasonable person would claim he could be, or even lay blame for this incident at the feet of Mr. Smith personally.

However, this incident did occur in the main office area at FHS, and presumably just feet from Mr. Smith's office.  How did this incident occur?  Why were two agitated, feuding students in the main office with no other adults, save one, immediately present?  Why were the students who filmed the incident permitted to roam the main offices at FHS?  What measures were put into place by the building's head principal, Mr. Smith, to ensure this sort of incident did not take place again?

Mr. Smith needs to explain what happened here.  The district never has explained.  Fairfield's solution often tends to be to ignore the public and hope we forget when an incident or scandal occurs.

We're certain that thin-skinned and unquestioning supporters of Fairfield City Schools will make their usual, played out claims that we're attacking Mr. Smith.  That we are the bullies, in fact.

That's a false argument.  A canard.  It's a talking point to distract you and the discussion away from the authentic issues we have raised here:

• Lack of integrity and transparency by the Board of Education
• Mr. Smith's lack of qualifications to be Superintendent of a district as large as Fairfield
• Mr. Smith's past actions and incidents 

Can district supporters and Fairfield City Schools address the issues we have raised?

We wish Mr. Smith all the best in his new position.  We're certain he will try his best.  And when Fairfield City Schools is actually ready to start working with the entire community - not just the vocal, increasingly small number of unquestioning supporters - our group will be here.

Why is There is a Scapegoat in the Emilie Olsen Case? Plenty of Blame is Available to Go Around

Remember back to your childhood for a moment.  Perhaps you and a group of friends had gotten into some kind of mischief in the neighborhood.  Maybe you had broken a window playing baseball in the front yard (even after the grownups told you over and over to use the wiffle ball). 

You know full well what you did was wrong.  There was a rule against playing baseball in the front yard.  You should have abided by the policy of the household.  But you persisted in doing it your way, not knowing until it was too late that your actions contributed to something unfortunate happening on accident. 

It wasn't completely your fault.  You were just standing there when the window got broken.  Maybe you weren't even paying attention.  You didn't throw the ball or even hit it.  It was a crime of omission rather than commission.

Now imagine you're the only person getting grounded for the broken window.  You aren't the only person who had a hand in this situation.  In fact, others are more to blame than you are.  So why are you the only one getting in trouble for it, you ask?

A certain public school employee in a local district is probably asking that very question today.  And he should be.  Something is rotten in our community, as usual.

Our activist watchdog group, Shame on Fairfield City Schools, has been highly critical of a public employee: Fairfield Middle School Principal Lincoln Butts.  On numerous occasions throughout the Emilie Olsen case, Mr. Butts has conducted himself in a manner that defies explanation or a credible means of defense.

Mr. Butts was head principal of Fairfield Middle School in the Autumn of 2014 as Emilie's bullying grew progressively worse.  Some have argued that since he was building administrator, Mr. Butts is solely responsible for everything that went on there.

We certainly see the point of that contention, but we have to disagree and take up defense for Mr. Butts.  We believe he is has been singled out for blame for some unknown reason.  It's wrong and it needs to stop.

To be certain, Mr. Butts has a great deal to answer for over his actions in the Emilie Olsen case.  The allegations made against him in the family's federal lawsuit are grave and serious.  In our opinion, Mr. Butts should have had his employment with Fairfield City Schools terminated.  He should not be serving our community a day longer. 

We too have documented several questionable actions by Mr. Butts.  We have documented evidence which proves what Fairfield City Schools (not Mr. Butts) had to say about the nature and purpose of his visit along with police to the Olsen home on December 16, 2014 was a complete and total fabrication.  That's according to a Fairfield Township Police report we blogged about recently.  We have also documented an e-mail conversation whereby Mr. Butts admitted to this group that the song "Another One Bites the Dust" was played over the PA system at the middle school to remind staff about a meeting in which a topic was Emilie's one-year memorial vigil:

While some of his actions have been questionable, Mr. Butts is being singled out for a scapegoat by the media and possibly even Fairfield City Schools itself.  He resigned recently, effective June 30, 2016, and you can read more about that  here in this WCPO story.  Following his resignation, even the Washington Post featured an article about Mr. Butts and Emilie's story. 

Our question is the same thing you should be asking: where are the consequences for the other staff and administrators at Fairfield City Schools who failed Emilie Olsen?

The first thing we'll say is that despite having received a mountain of documents, e-mails, confidential eyewitness reports, and other information of all sorts, we have yet to be able to definitively point to any scrap of evidence that proves Principal Lincoln Butts was notified in real time of the bullying Emilie Olsen was going through while she was attending Fairfield Middle School in 2014.

Yes, you read that correctly.  Despite the media's vilification of this man, even harsh critics of the district like ourselves cannot claim or prove Mr. Butts was ever told of Emilie's bullying while she was alive. 

This apparent fact does not absolve Mr. Butts of possible culpability, and nor does it explain away some of his other actions since Emilie's death.  He was still administrator of the middle school and bears some burden of responsibility for anything that occurs there. 

But fair is fair: Mr. Butts was apparently never informed of what Emilie was going through as it happened.

Yes, we know what you're thinking.  What about all the e-mails and incident reports that Fairfield City Schools has showing Emilie was bullied?  That's an excellent question.

We know for a fact, thanks to public records requests, that Marc Olsen sent the following e-mail to Fairfield Intermediate School Assistant Principals Allison Cline and Missy Muller on January 30, 2014, when Emilie was in 6th grade:

 

As you can see for yourself, Mr. Olsen spells out in great detail the bullying Emilie was facing.  Students are named.  Emilie was being harassed online and in person on the grounds at FIS. 

Through our public records requests, we obtained copies of all e-mail activities for both Ms. Cline and  Ms. Muller from January 30th-February 6th, 2014.  We also obtained e-mail activity from the same time frame for Fairfield Intermediate School Principal Jeffrey Madden, as well as Superintendent Paul Otten and Assistant Superintendent Roger Martin.  We found no evidence that either Ms. Cline or Ms. Muller had forwarded Mr. Olsen's e-mail to anyone in their chain of command at Fairfield City Schools during the specified time frame. 

This very problematic for the district generally, and these two employees particularly.  Fairfield City Schools has a clear bullying policy, in accordance with Ohio Law.  You can check it out here.  Among other things, the harassment policy (which also covers cyberbullying) states:

 

• "No administrator, teacher or other employee of the District shall encourage, permit, condone or tolerate any hazing and/or bullying activities..." 
• "All hazing, bullying and/or dating violence incidents are reported immediately to the Superintendent/designee and appropriate discipline is administered..." 

As you can clearly see, policy mandates employees like assistant principals to inform their chain of command and the Superintendent of all bullying incidents.  We can say with certainty that Fairfield Intermediate School Assistant Principals Allison Cline and Missy Muller never informed by e-mail anyone in leadership of the bullying reported by Marc Olsen by e-mail from January 30th-February 6th, 2014. 

Perhaps leaders were informed afterwards or by some other means, but it was not by e-mail during the specified timeframe.  We have the e-mails of all district employees involved, and can state positively that nothing in the documents indicate that the issues raised by Marc Olsen about Emilie's harassment at FIS were forwarded by e-mail in the week after the school was made aware of the situation.

It gets even worse though.  Check this out.  It's a forward of Marc Olsen's January 30th, 2014 e-mail to FIS Assistant Principal Allison Cline.  She forwarded it after Emilie's death to district Public Relations Director Gina Gentry-Fletcher, Mr. Otten, and others; with some enlightening comments:

 

 

It was sent December 17th, 2014.  That was almost a week after Emilie's death, and at the height of the community's anger with the district over what was an obvious scandal.

 

As you can see for yourself, administrators at FIS "usually follow this sort of thing with a phone call," according to this e-mail.  Ms. Cline also claims that Ms. Muller spoke with at least one teacher and all those involved in the alleged bullying of Emilie.

 

So where was the bullying report?  When did these assistant principals inform their chain of command or Superintendent about this bullying incident, which Ohio law and district policy mandates?

 

It's great and all that some kind of phone call was made.  It's great the bullies were spoken too.  But where was the report?  Why wasn't the district's bullying policy adhered to?  A bullying report would have started a paper trail that could have been used as evidence and a credible reason to render assistance to Emilie when the bullying carried over into the next school year.

 

And that bullying did carry over to the Autumn of 2014 when Emilie was a 7th grader at Fairfield Middle School.  Even before classes began, Emilie's father, Marc Olsen, was concerned.  On August 15th, 2014, Mr. Olsen wrote this e-mail to FMS Assistant Principal Mark Rice, where he spells out his specific concerns for Emilie, and even forwards the e-mail detailing the bullying he reported to FIS administrators on January 30, 2014:

Through public records request, we have obtained all e-mail activities for Mr. Rice, Principal Lincoln Butts, the Superintendent and his secretary, and the correspondence for the Assistant Superintendent from August 15-22, 2014.  Again, we can find no evidence that Mr. Rice even responded by e-mail to Mr. Olsen, or that this anticipated bullying was passed along to anyone else at Fairfield City Schools.

 

In the Olsen family's federal lawsuit against Fairfield City Schools, it is alleged that several employees at the middle school were informed or had knowledge of bullying Emilie was facing that Fall in 2014.  The lawsuit alleges that throughout the Fall of 2014, the Olsen family was barraging administrators at teachers at Fairfield Middle School with requests for help, information, guidance, and schedule change requests.  We have submitted public records requests for some of these purported e-mail correspondences, but have yet to receive them all.

 

The below eyewitness statements to a bullying incident at the middle school on October 21st, 2014, in which Emilie was the apparent target, seem to lend credence to what the lawsuit alleges:

 

 

 

These are powerful statements detailing how Emilie had been bullied that day, that year, and the year before.  Most damning of all in our minds is the last eyewitness statement.  Read it carefully.  Mr. Rice is mentioned by name as the staff member who broke up the altercation and sent everyone down to the office. 

 

These eyewitness statements from just a few short, precious weeks before Emilie passed away create a lot of issues and questions for a great many employees of Fairfield City Schools.  Who were these eyewitness reports given to at the main office?  Why didn't these reports get into the hands of investigating police after Emilie's death?  Where were these reports when police were investigating?

 

Lastly, according to these eyewitness statements, Mr. Rice had knowledge of at least one incident involving Emilie.  The Olsen lawsuit alleges more.  So what did Mr. Rice know, and when did he know it?  We have an e-mail from that August proving he was made aware of bullying Emilie faced the year before. 

 

Where was the followup?  What actions were taken?  Why weren't dots connected?  Was the district's bullying policy followed?

 

As you can see, there are other people employed by Fairfield City Schools who have a lot of explaining to do in the Emilie Olsen case.  Many people have a lot more questions to answer than Fairfield Middle School Principal Lincoln Butts, who we feel is being unfairly scapegoated and singled out for some reason. 

 

Yes, Mr. Butts should have resigned.  Yes, his actions in visiting the Olsen home days after Emilie passed away was wrong.  He should not have played "Another One Bites the Dust" over the PA system to remind staff about a meeting where Emilie's vigil was discussed.  Mr. Butts probably should have had better command and control of his building. 

 

But a building administrator can only address the issues that are brought to his attention by staff and subordinate administrators.

 

Unlike three current assistant principals still employed by Fairfield City Schools however, we can find not a single piece of evidence that Mr. Butts was ever informed of the bullying Emilie Olsen was facing while she was still alive.  We have e-mails and other documents which prove that three other district administrators were informed of Emilie's harassment though. 

 

And despite being in possession of a mountain of e-mails, we cannot find proof that any of these three administrators in question adhered to the district's bullying policy by informing either their own chain of command or the Superintendent about the bullying Emilie was facing.

 

So why are these three administrators still on the district payroll, and safely tucked away out of the media limelight?