Jump to content
Don Quixote rides again!
Study shows who gets the government to act.
This (or any) student could have refused to allow the search and only lost the ability to drive and park on campus.
My thoughts are that online speculation about Mr. Meeks and his decision making process cannot be fair as he cannot respond, give the evidence that could support his decision and thus given due process. I trust the people I elect to the school Board, and continued second guessing their decisions without all the evidence is not fair to the School Board, or Mr. Meeks.
Suggestions of a investigation are just more speculation. For all we know he was wrongly accused of a unfair decision that was in fact justifiable but due to confidentiality limits he could not explain his reasoning. Sound familiar?
From the story;
"It's unclear exactly what prompted the deal, but news of Meeks' impending departure comes less than two months after the swearing-in of three board members who were critical of district leadership in their campaigns.
Weeks before they took office, the previous board censured Tim Burke, a board member who has been at loggerheads with the superintendent for years. Burke's alleged offenses included persistent attempts to undermine Meeks' credibility, as well as the illegal disclosure of personnel data and information from closed meetings."
Liz, the standard for evidence for criminal charges may be far different than for expulsion.
Everything posted on this forum is speculation, and should not be taken as fact unless backed up with evidence, and printed by the paper. I trust nothing I read here as fact, only opinion.
"Ruined life" is such a hard term to use for someone that hasn't even begun their adult life. High school may be the pinnacle of a child life, but it is not a deciding factor for adult life unless you allow it to be. And this letter seems to say that by the time of the hearing, she had already been out of school longer than suspension allowed, so Meeks may have had not choice, he certainly didn't have the choice to accept the ruling, the rules specifically say a student can't be suspended that long.
Reading this statement, I think its a far stretch to say Meeks was acting maliciously with his judgement. Sounds like he was trapped by procedure, and forced to enforce the sentencing rules.
No proof that we know of, because the school officials cannot talk about this case. For all the speculation to the contrary, for all we know they had evidence from other students that she was in fact dealing. She could have avoided this by not allowing them to search her car, walking to school after getting banned from driving would have been a smarter choice than even the suspension she should have known was coming if they found her stash. Ask ex-sheriff Wall about how to avoid allowing evidence of a crime to come into play.
I think this is the case. Anyway, the main issue of this case is the determination that she was dealing. Dealing = expulsion. Like others have posted, if it was a cut and dry charge, like gun possession, we wouldn't question that expulsion was the required, but do to a judgement based on evidence we will never know, we are left with questions.
As I said before, this is a small bump in the road, I knew fellow students that were criminally charged dealing in high school, when weed was illegal, and justice in Oklahoma was mercy less. Those friends put their high school misdeed behind them, and became successful adults despite the felony charges they received for dealing weed in my high school. They did not let felony convictions stop them in adulthood and this expulsion will not stop this student unless she lets it.
To be clear, posting to this forum should not be a challenge from which you get defeated. It certainly devalues the term courage to assign it to anyone for posting on this forum.
I support your original position, but it is not what we voted for.
Last login: yesterday
Contents of this site are © Copyright 2014 Steamboat Pilot & Today. All rights reserved.