Discussion of ICSD Statement of Material Facts

From TattlerWiki

Download the Statement of Material Facts

SEE ALSO:

Comments on the ICSD discovery documents (interesting revelations)

Corroboration of ICSD Statement of Material Facts

Contents 1 #1 2 #2 3 #3 4 #4 5 #5 6 #6 7 #7 8 #8 9 #9 10 #10 11 #11 12 #12 13 #13 14 #14 15 #15 16 #16 17 #17 18 #18 19 #19 20 #20 21 #21 22 #22 23 #23 24 #24 25 #25 26 #26 27 #27 28 #28 29 #29 30 #30 31 #31 32 #32 33 #33 34 #34 35 #35 36 #36 37 #37 38 #38 39 #39 40 #40 41 #41 42 #42 43 #43 44 #44 45 #45 46 #46 47 #47 48 #48 49 #49 50 #50 51 #51 52 #52 53 #53 54 #54 55 #55 56 #56 57 #57 58 #58 59 #59 60 #60 61 #61 62 #62 63 #63 64 #64 65 #65 66 #66 67 #67 68 #68 69 #69 70 #70 71 #71 72 #72 73 #74 74 #75 75 #76 76 #77 77 #78 78 #79 79 #80 80 #81 81 #82 82 #83 83 #84 84 #85 85 #86 86 #87 87 #88 88 #89 89 #90 90 #91 91 #92 92 #93 93 #94 94 #95 95 #96 96 #97 97 #98 98 #99 99 #100 100 #101 101 #102 102 #103 103 #104 104 #105 105 #106 106 #107 107 #108 108 #109 109 #110 110 #111 111 #112 112 #113 113 #114 114 #115 115 #116 116 #117 117 #118 118 #119 119 #120 120 #121 121 #122 122 #123 123 #124 124 #125 125 #126 126 #127 127 #128 128 #129 129 #130 130 #131 131 #132 132 #133 133 #134 134 #135 135 #136 136 #137 137 #138 138 #139 139 #140 140 #141 141 #142 142 #143 143 #144 144 #148 145 #149 146 #150 147 #151 148 #152 149 #153 150 #154 151 #155 152 #156 153 #157 154 #158 155 #159 156 #160 157 #161 158 #162 159 #162 (2) 160 #163 161 See Also

#1

• Defendant Judith Pastel has been Superintendent of the Ithaca City School District since 1996 and is currently Superintendent

Unfortunate but true.

#2

• Defendant Joseph Wilson began his position as the Principal of IHS in July 2004 and is currently the Principal of IHS

same

#3

• Defendant Dr. William Russell was Assistant Superintendent of the Ithaca City School District from July 1, 2000 to June 30, 2006, and is currently the Superintendent at the Oswego Central School District

fine

#4

• Plaintiff RO served as Editor-in-Chief of The Tattler during the 2004-2005 academic year at the IHS

#5

• Plaintiff RO was involved with production of The Tattler from 2001 to 2005, having served as Editor-in-Chief of The Tattler during the 2004-2005 school year. Plaintiff RMO graduated from IHS in June 2005 and currently attends Cornell University.

- RO was a staff photographer from 01-02 and photo editor 02-04 (RMO dep p28). RO has also worked for the local newspaper, the ithaca times, as a freelance photographer and designer (RMO dep 10)

#6

• Plaintiff BE was a member of the Tattler staff during the 2003-2004 academic year and served as Distribution Manager during the 2004-2005 academic year. Plaintiff BE graduated from IHS in June 2005 and currently attends Cornell University.

- fine, and Bryan was distribution manager from 2003-2005 (BE dep 12)

#7

• Plaintiff TS served as Copy Editor and a member of the editorial board of The TAttler during the 2004-2005 academic school year. Plaintiff TS graduated from IHS in June 2005 and currently attends Leland Stanford Junior University

- fine, and Trevor was a staff writer from 2002-2003 and Features Editor from 2003-2004 (Trevor dep 11). and his future alma mater is also known as Stanford University.

#8

• PLaintiff HS served as Sports Editor of The Tattler for the 2003-2004 and 2004-2005 school yaears. Plaintiff HS graduated from IHS in June 2005 and currently attends Boston University.

-okay

Except I'm not plaintiff HS, I'm Plaintiff Harry Stinson, since I was 18 when we started the case. Also, I was a staff writer for 2001-2003, mostly in sports. -Ted

#9

• Plaintiff AA served as the Activities Editor for THe Tattler durin gthe 2003-2004 school year and as New [SIC] Editor during the 2004-2005 academic year. Although Plaintiff AA did not formally graduate from IHS in June 2005, he currently attends the University of Chicago.

-note typo - I was NEWS editor.

#10

• Plaintiff LF served as the Advertising Manager for The Tattler during the 2003-2004 academic year and as the photography editor during the 2004-2005 academic year. Plaintiff LF graduated from IHS in JUne 2005 and currently attends the State University of New York, Albany.

- and Laura was also a writer in 2003. Laura Dep 14.

#11

• Plaintiff AH was in charge of the Arts and Entertainment section of The Tattler for the 2003-2004 and 2004-2005 school years. Plaintiff AH graduated from IHS in June 2005 and currently attends Brown University.

-Abe was the A&E *EDITOR*, and was also a writer from 2002-2003 (Abe dep 13-14)

#12

• PLaintiff PP served as the News Editor for The Tattler during the 2003-2004 school year and Layout Editor during the 2004-2005. Plaintiff PP graduated from IHS in June 2005 and currently attends Harvard University.

-yes, and Prabhas was a writer from 2001-2003 (Prabhas dep 13-14). he is a CS major at Harvard (Prabhas Dep 9)

#13

• The Tattler is the newspaper of Ithaca High School and has been published by students attending IHS since 1892.

-well, well, well. The Tattler was first published in 1892 (December 1st, 1892, in fact), and has been published *almost* continuously since then, but not completely continuously (e.g., it had a different name in the 1980s, and gaps in the paper's archive suggest gaps in publication.) It has historically been produced largely by IHS students (although having occasional alumni or ACS contributors) and distributed mostly at IHS (although also distributed elsewhere). Most of the news content is about IHS, but there's lots about other ICSd and Board of Ed stuff, other news, and lots of unrelated stuff.)

AND the ICSD makes it clear that they're not even certain: "Who 'owns' The Tattler (paper, right to publish, name)?" D00660

#14

• The purpose of The Tattler is to provide experiential learning to those students interested in a career in journalism, as the IHS does not currently have a formal journalism course.

No, no, no, no, no. First of all, IHS DOES have a journalism class (Rob Dep 273, Pastel Dep 5, Russell Dep 38, and all of ER Bach's memos). Secondly, what IS the purpose of the Tattler? I don't think that the answer to that is a "material fact" that belongs in this section... or, i dunno. I'll work on this.

This seems a strange description of the Tattler's purpose: the career objectives of students who create the Tattler is, first, unknown, and second, irrelevant. It would be like saying that the school supports sports teams to provide "experiential learning" for students interested in a "career" in sports. Also, the implication of the last part of the sentence is that the newspaper would not be supported if the school had a "formal journalism course." Again, this seems quite strange, and misrepresents the purpose and role of the newspaper within the school, and for the students who create it. Why would a journalism course (whatever that is) preclude support for a school newspaper?

I seem to recall we printed a short statement of what our purpose was for printing The Tattler on the masthead of every paper. If this isn't true, I thought that our purpose was to serve as a forum for the student body, both to educate ourselves on what was going on with the school and also to allow us to voice concerns we had with how our school was being run. Probably more importantly for us editors, it was a chance to work on our writing and have some fun by creating something we could be proud of. Maybe that's too corny. In any case, the district certainly never told us what they thought was the purpose of all our hard work; if anyone had mentioined to me that they thought I was editing the sports section to prepare for a career in journalism, I would have laughed at them.-Ted

As this was explained to me at various times -- open house days for parents at the high school, by Ms Bach informally at CTB, Ms Vinch, Ms Teulkowsky, among others I was told that The Tattler was a forum for student thought. It was never mentioned that this was in preparation for futures in journalism...it was specifically told to me by Ms Bach at that time that there was no journalism being taught at the High School although at times some students because of the long hours they put into producing this paper they may or may not be given some school credit. Ms Bach did say that when there have been classes in journalism that did not necessarily insure that those student enrolled in the course would work on the Tattler or even have any of their work published in the Tattler...The Tattler was independent of any class. -Parent

I think it might be best just to reference the Program of Studies, available on the IHS website. The description for the Journalism course states, "This course is for those who wish to develop a background in journalism, write for an audience, learn editing skills, and publish. Students will practice skills such as interviewing, conducting surveys, writing news, reviews, feaures, and sports stories as well as editorial writing and writing advertising copy. Editing skills and layout design will be addressed. In addition to using a textbook that covers topics ranging from form to ethics, students will use a daily newspaper and weekly periodicals to analyze news coverage." IHS is not a trade school and does not purport to groom students for any career. - Ms. Bach

#15

• The ICSD provides The Tattler with an annual budget to cover the cost of postage, printing, and publication

No. The ICSD did provide the Tattler with a small stipend (amount? financial records?) that covered minimal expenses. The Tattler cost about $700/issue to print (Rob Dep 47-48). All other costs paid for by advertising; typically paper completely paid for by ads (Rob Dep 154). The Tattler paid for postage, using the ICSD's postage meter but being billed by ICSD for said use. FINANCES. I am not sure what they mean by "publication" costs other than printing and postage.

I was specifically told that the Tattler raised money for publication through subscriptions, donations, advertising and other fundraising activities. At the IHS Open House there were donation and subscription solicitations every year that I attended. Parent

FROM ICSD DOCS: A question in the interview of potential advisors asks, "The bulk of funding for the paper comes from selling advertisements. …" (Bates D00622) I.e., the ICSD admits that the paper is mostly self-supported.

The funding from the district has held steady at an amount approximately equivalent to printing two issues of the paper, not including any other expenses, from at least the 1990s. I can ask the accounts clerk for annual records that detail monies raised and expended by students to produce the paper. The accounts clerk is efficient and non-partisan and I should be able to get those the same day I ask - I'll try to remember to do that tomorrow. - Ms. Bach

#16

• The Tattler has had a Faculty Advisor since at least 1979

The Tattler did not have a faculty adviser between February and May of 2005. Also, it was not known as The Tattler in the 80s.And advisor compensation has varied, before Bach, advisor got 2 periods to work on Tattler.

#17

• A teacher at the IHS traditionally serves as Faculty Advisor to oversee the production of The Tattler and to provide teaching and guidance to the students who produce it

The Tattler, like all extracurricular activities, is required to have a faculty advisor, according to the student code of conduct.

#18

• The ICSD provides the Faculty Advisor for The Tattler with an annual stipend for his or her role as Faculty Advisor

The stipend is contractual and includes incremental increases. It is about $1,200/year, or close to that figure. -Ms. Bach

#19

• The Faculty Advisor for The Tattler has received teaching release credits for acting as Faculty Advisor pursuant to the collective bargaining agreement between the ICSD and the ITA since at least 1996

'Teaching release credits' is an odd term, but the teacher who advises The Tattler currently is paid .2FTE for advising The Tattler (My predecessor received .4FTE when he was hired as advisor but was cut to .2FTE due in part to publishing only two issues, despite the fact that all the district funded was two issues, a bone of contention for him). - Ms. Bach

#20

• Teaching release credit for one class period is equivalent to teaching one class

That's the intent. -Ms. Bach

#21

• As the Faculty Advisor's normal class load must still be covered, the District must pay the incidental cost for another faculty member to cover the Faculty Advisor's released class

This isn't clear to me, at least the way they put it... they pay a teacher .2 FTE to supervise the Tattler. that's it. it has nothing to do with paying other teachers, just that .2 of the ICSD's ~700 FTE goes to the Tattler and not, say, gym.

The remark above is correct. There are many teachers 'released from a class' for other duties, from department leaders to WISE coordinators, etc. It is simply how FTE is used, and probably most - but not all - release periods are contractual (including the release period for The Tattler). Some appear to be at the discretion of the principal (WISE, 9th grade initiative, etc.). -Ms. Bach

#22

• Stephanie Vinch served as The Tattler's Faculty Advisor from 2003 until she resigned from that position on February 3, 2005

note that she started in the beginning of the 2003-2004 school year, i.e., in summer 2003.

AND NOTE that her prerogatives as advisor were not the same as ERB's: "I was distressed to find that my release from a duty [e.g. hall monitoring, study hall supervising] in order to supervise students in the Tattler office (in addition to the single period release from class) was denied my successor [Vinch]. This effectively halved her compensation in terms of time working with students" (Bach's 2/13/05 memo to Bill Russell, parentheses by Andrew)

#23

• Eileen Bach servbed as The Tattler's faculty advisor from 1993 until 2003

until the end of the 02-03 school year, yes. NOTE (?) that part of the reason why she left, she says, is because the Tattler grew a lot under her care but "This increase in work has not led to an accompanying increase in compensation for the adviser, a major factor in my decision to step down as adviser." this may not help us, but it's interesting. (Bach's 2/13/05 memo to Bill Russell, p.3)

I began advising The Tattler in 1992-1993; I don't know how crucial compensation will be in determining independent status, but it is easy to show from my records over the years that I worked far more than one class equivalent, and so was compensated for a fraction of the time I spent as advisor. -Ms. Bach

#24

• The ICSD has provided The Tattler's staff and the Faculty Advisor with funding to attend student journalism conferences

I (Andrew) can speak to this very specifically, as in 03-04 I was in charge of coordinating our trip to the Columbia Scholastic Press Assn.'s annual convention at Columbia in NYC. Students paid for hotel and registration fees, but the cost of transportation to NYC was prohibitive, and we were looking into several creative options when, all of a sudden (I don't remember how it came about) Vinch met with Chuck LaBarbera, interim IHS principal, and he agreed to pay for our transportation. I don't remember the total transporation cost that year, but I think it was around $1200. The total non-transportation cost was $786, according to a 2/8/04 email I sent, coming out to $61/person.

In 2005, Scott Zuccarino was in charge of organizing it. I don't remember rexactly what happened, but I know that we decided to try to get funding for transporation the same way as we had the previous year. Even though the money would be coming from the principal, we figured that Wilson, with his rhetoric about "more training for student editors!", would avoid making himself look dangerously hypocritical by refusing us money that we had received in the past. Indeed, Wilson gave us some of his discretionary money––about $1600, I think, taken from student parking permit payments––and we used that to pay for transportation. I don't know what the per-person cost worked out to, but I think it was slightly higher. As in 2004, students paid for their own hotel & registration (as well as food, etc.).

The ICSD's assertion here implies that the ICSD was sending us, at their impetus, to journalism conferences. Absolutely not true. The only reason we went in 2004––this is kinda self-promoting, but it's true––was because I (Andrew) wanted us to go, and took the initiative to start organizing the trip after Ms. Vinch and Adri (the 03-04 EiC) passed the ball. The trip was almost completely planned by me, including filling out and submitting the many official field trip forms to the main office. Likewise, in 2005, Scott Zuccarino organized the trip mostly single-handedly, and in fact, it was made especially difficult when Ms. Vinch resigned and we had to beg faculty members to come with us (which is required). Like the rest of the paper, it was completely student-driven and student-organized. The ICSD provided some money but nothing more. AMHA.

---

It should also be noted that students working on The Tattler have won very prestigious awards and recognition for their hard work in a very competitive field ...these conferences are an educational resource as well as a venue for receiving the recognition and applause they deserve for jobs well done. Parent

When and how much? How much came from other sources? Where is documentation to support this? When was the precedent? Isn't this customary for all student newspapers? If not there would be no conferences and no students attending them.

---

This year, the ICSD didn't give us money to attend the conference, though that wasn't really the reason why we didn't go. Our office manager was delinquent this year, so, nobody ended up planning the trip. Maybe Alice Linton, the IHS student Activities finance person, has documentation tracking the fact that less money came into the Tattler account from the ICSD than went out for the CSPA trip? -Scott-

It would be easy to show how much money came from Tattler advertising coffers - all money that comes into and out of the Student Activities account is money the Tattler raised through various means, and it all is detailed clearly. District money is a separate office with separate paperwork and with strings attached (for example, you cannot buy second-hand equipment with district money, and if the money is not encumbered by April 1st, the money is returned to a central district fund). We did not receive money for attendance at conferences but it gets tricky - I think one or two years we did have registration fees paid from district money and we piggybacked with the Annual since they were flush and could pay for the transporation - neither The Tattler nor the district paid for transportation those years. Students always paid hotel, food, sometimes registration and partial transportation. -Ms. Bach

---

email from ms. bach:

I have copies of all monies deposited to and withdrawn from the Student Activities Account for both 2001-2002 (arbitrary date) and 2004-2005. This is money Tattler staff raised and expended, not district money, but it does include a transfer of $1800 from student parking fees to pay for the conference. However, conference fees are noted below and exceed the amount transferred (essentially, all was paid for except the hotel):

FOR 2004-2005:

CSPA Registration: $612 Travel: $1123.84 CSPA Membership: $114 Hotel: $1061.88

This also shows collection for the trip, presumably collected from students for the hotel?: $1585

This shows expenditures for office supplies: $30.54, $9.88 and the Tattler racks: $206.55 and printing: $690 (Nov), $795 (Jan), $1854 (Sept, Dec. Jan.) $247.35 (March), $32.49 (March), $715 (June - includes $500 transfer from Senior Class to pay for this issue).

FOR 2002-2002: Conference fees from Tattler funds, not district funds: CSPA registration: $354 Hotel fees: $1074 Fees collected from students for conference: $210, $140 (notations show students paid $70 each) Transportation was paid with Annual funds

Have to run to duty - will drop these off to you and try to get the same for district funds - Ms. Bach

---

From Ms. Vinch's Deposition: "the district sent us to Columbia University where I sat in on workshops for advisors, certainly the district paid for that, and we went to Syracuse University and the same thing, while the students were in their workshops, I was in workshops with other advisors, so I would consider that training." (pp. 50-51)

Does anyone remember what Ms. vinch told us after those "training" sessions of hers at Columbia (which we funded, ironically)? She told us something like, "Wow, all these other advisors practically do the paper by themselves, and I told them, 'Well, my kids do everything!'" She was elated. Just a little note. Of course, there's no documentation to prove it, but she might admit it if you asked her about it. -Ted

#25

• The ICSD provides The Tattler with an office inside the IHS which it historically shared with the IHS's yearbook, The Annual

this is true. But ERB will go on and on about how hard she fought to get an office--apparently the Tattler used to not have any office and then just had a closet. And at times, our access was sporadic, e.g., being closed early in the 04-05 school year and in May 2004

Didn't it share the office so supervision could be shared?

Closure of the office after lost advisor: D00630. Of course, supervision wasn't a problem here because there already was supervision... they were just trying to keep us out of the office.

When I came in 1979, The Tattler had an office linked to the advisor's room. When the 9th grade was added (1985, I think), space was at a premium and The Tattler was at a low point, including lacking any office. The first Tattler 'office' was literally a closet in upstairs G building (now a broom closet) while The Annual operated out of the advisor's room. The two publications shared premises in later years primarily because I advised both for several years. -Ms. Bach

#26

• The ICSD pays for all expenses related to the maintenance and operation of The Tattler's office, including, inter alia, heat, light, power, maintenance, cleaning, and insurance

good god, why won't they just shut up already?

The ICSD continued to pay for these services even when they did not allow the students to use the office. Or did they disconnect the electricity?

This makes me laugh because there are no heating elements in ANY of The Tattler offices (post 1985, anyway); all spaces are internal spaces with no windows and no heating elements. And no airconditioning in G building or in B building (Student Activities - we had the former school store premises for about two years, eliminated during renovations). -Ms. Bach

#27

• The ICSD also provides The Tattler office with computers, a phone, a free phone line, internet access, an access code to a District photocopier, office supplies, and furniture

Rob can attest to the shitty state of the computers. likewise the phoen only made local calls. The access code to a photocopier was only after I (Andrew) begged a secretary in late 2004 to give us one, and it was shut down pretty quickly after the Tattler was. All of the office supplies were bought with Tattler money, and at least half, if not more, of the furniture was brought in by editors.

Who paid for the Adobe Creative Suite? We did all tech support... computers rarely worked & did a lot of work at home. Up until the beginning of the 04-05 school year, we only had one computer, the circa 2000 G3, whose monitor then broke. Had to beg for them, e.g., letting Jeff Spence let us borrow the eMac.

The provision of "computers" should perhaps be challenged, or at least critiqued: were the computers always adequate to the tasks at hand? was all necessary software for the production of the tattler provided? were the computers and software upgraded as required? was all tattler work accomplished using the school's computers, or did some work (e.g., writing of articles) get done on students' personal machines?

I donated a hot water heater and a fan. Evan donated a CD player.

I brought a coffee pot, much to the chagrin of my teachers who had to listen to me slurp from my mug all day long. But, admittedly, I stole the electricity to run it. And the water I put in it came from the water fountain, also district property. Hey, does that mean they get to restrict how all the students pee? -Ted

Some of the furniture in the office was provided by the district--not all. When I was office manager, I found (or Rob found) a green cabinet that was being thrown away and brought it to the office with Rob or Andrew's help. Also, I'm fairly sure that we procured our bookshevles that way too. Oh, and Kristen Tauer provided our mini-fridge for two years (04-06). This year, Jarrah bought a minifridge at a garage sale for $30, which she may or may not have been reimbursed for... -Scott-

The Tech Committee of IHS authorized the purchase of Adobe Creative Suite software when RT brought it to the attention of the Committee that we did not have legal software. This then came out of the District software budget. RT

We purchased the first Tattler computer from our funds, and purchased the two printers used from about 1995 - 2003 (consecutive purchase and use, not concurrent) as well as most (but not all) office supplies from our funds. The Tattler refrigerator (does the Annual have it now ? ? ?) was negotiated in return for ads for Thayer Appliance, and numerous other items were brought in by staff, including an answering machine donated by Liesle Sasche. I think the Pagemaker program we used was initially purchased by us but upgraded as part of a site license; I'm not 100% certain of that, though, and I think Evan may have brought in an updated copy that he could use legally. We purchased one camera from our funds but students generally used their own cameras. We did have our own access code, agreed to at about the time I began to advise the Annual - I remember getting (different) codes for both at the same time. -Ms. Bach

#28

• Students are permitted to work on the Tattler during school hours

yes, but most Tattler work happens out of school hours.

This is not absolute: students do not have a "blank check" to work on the Tattler when they choose during "school hours" but only subject to their other school commitments (e.g., attending class).

This has been at the discretion of the Advisor and ICSD...to punish the Tattler staff the office was closed. Student did the work elsewhere -- off school grounds...not using school resources. Parent

Mrs. Swartz and I shared supervision so that The Tattler office could remain open every period for students to work (we also shared a classroom, which made our hours sharing the office consecutive and not concurrent). I did lock the office if I was going to be at a parent conference or spending most of one period with the accounts clerk, etc. We did not have students work in the office unsupervised. That fell apart pretty quickly when we both were on leave and our successors were given duties out of the office and/or did not have teaching schedules that allowed consecutive instead of concurrent periods of supervision. -Ms. Bach

#29

• In the last ten to fifteen years, the Tattler has increased from one issue per marking period, to six issue per year to one issue per month.

Not entirely true. Last year, we combined the January and December issue (though made up for that combination with two April issues--one April Fools' issue and one real one). This year, we've sucked. We combined January and February, and we've also combined March and April. [Insert Loud Obscenity]!!!!!! -Scott-

#30

• On May 5th, 2004, an issue of the Tattler was published which contained a personals ad entitled "Personales..."

#31

The "Personales..." personal ad insinuated that the president of the IHS Class of 2005 was a homosexual

Not true. The ad neither stated nor insinuated anything about the sexual orientation of the IHS student body president. Read the ad...

#32

After the publication of the "Personales..." personal ad Faculty Advisor at that time Stephanie Vinch (hereinafter "Ms. Vinch") believed that the students had intentionally inserted the "Personales..." personal ad after she had reviewed her "proof set" of the issue

That Ms Vinch had a "belief" is not the same as saying that Ms Vinch had anything remotely resembling objective evidence; in fact, the students explained in exhausting detail why Ms Vinch's proof did not contain the ad; in that context, her "belief" can be seen as irrational.

See Evan Williams email to Bach and Vinch 5/7/04, for Evan's outlining how how the ad got into the paper.

#33

As a result of her belief that students had intentionally inserted the "Personales" personal ad in the May 5, 2004 issue of The Tattler, Ms Vinch cancelled the next issue of The Tattler that was slated to be produced in June of 2004

Whether the Tattler was cancelled because of the alleged "belief" of Ms Vinch should, perhaps, be challenged. There may have been other motivations.

TODO: Let's also detail exactly how the cancellation happened--i.e., how hard we tried to reason with her.

PERSONALES: Ted dep 53-58, Trevor dep 39-43, Prabhas dep 59-61, Abe dep 41-43, Laura dep 46-49, Andrew dep 68-74, Rob dep 138-146

JUNE ISSUE: Ted dep 58-61, Trevor dep 43-44, Prabhas dep 62-65, Abe dep 43-44, Laura dep 50-55 (includes June Issue ads), Andrew dep 71-83, Rob dep 146-168

#34

At the time Ms Vinch cancelled the June 2004 issue of The Tattler, each of the named plaintiffs were members of The Tattler Editorial Board

yes, BUT note how there were others, i.e., the EiC, Copy Editor, Layout Editor, Laura Burkhauser (honoris causa), etc.

#35

In the fall of 2004, Defendant Joseph Wilson began his first year as Principle [sic] of IHS

???

#36

• In mid-October 2004, the Tattler disseminated a survey to the student body which asked students to evaluate their confidence in Mr. Wilson's ability to perform his job.

Maybe we should produce the survey and note exactly what was on it. Also note that it was approved by the school district(?) [What do you mean here? The student survey was not submitted for approval. -Rob]. And perhaps the fact that Wilson's competence and suitability for IHS was a polarizing topic among both students and staff at the time.

survey: rob dep 180-191, andrew dep 100-104. also see rob's survey timeline packet, andrew's comments on survey stuff in ICSD discovery in his email.

#37

The results of the student survey--which indicaed a lack of confidence in defendant Wilson's ability to perform his job were published in a November 3, 2004 issue of The Tattler

see above

#38

In November of 2004, The Tattler sought to conduct a survey of the IHS faculty concerning the faculty's confidence in Mr. Wilson's ability to perform his job.

see above

#39

The ICSD's Policy Manual states that surveys must be approved by the Supt before they can be distributed

??? is THIS legal?

This was the policy prior to 2003, but I think it was instituted as a district policy after the survey of students' sexual habits published in the February 1997 edition of The Tattler. I don't think there was a policy prior to 1997. What is the survey policy for AP stats classes? I recall that was a bone of contention for us, that there appeared to be one rule for AP stats classes and another rule for The Tattler. - Ms. Bach

#40

• The Tattler sought permission from Superintendent of Schools for the ICSD Judith Pastel (hereinafter "Superintendent Pastel") to distribute the faculty survey

#41

• Superintendent Pastel denied permission to distribute the initial faculty survey as written, as it had the potential for identifying teachers based on their responses, which had the potential for running afoul with the collective bargaining agreement between the ICSD and the Ithaca Teachers Association

#42

• Superintendent Pastel gave The Tattler an opportunity to present a revised survey that omitted the personally identifying information

#43

• After Superintendent Pastel gave The Tattler an opportunity to present a revised survey that omitted the personally identifying information, The Tattler submitted a second survey for approval

#44

• The Tattler was granted permission to administer the revised faculty survey

I'm not sure that this accurately characterizes the content of the second faculty survey as a mere "revision" of the first.

#45

• The results of the revised survey of the faculty were published in the December 8, 2004 issue of The Tattler

#46

• No administrator nor faculty member, inclusive of all Defendants herein, interfered with or took any adverse action against any editor or staff member of The Tattler as a result of these surveys

#47

• In or about late December 2004/early January 2005, Ms. Vinch was presented with a "proof-set" of the January issue of The Tattler to review for publication

#48

• For each issue of The Tattler, Ms. Vinch was given a proof set to review, edit and alter prior to the publication

#49

• Upon reviewing the proof set of the January 5, 2005 issue of The Tattler, Ms. Vinch saw, for the first time, a drawing which depicted stick figures posed in sexual positions on a blackboard with a teacher standing and pointing at the figures (hereinafter "Sexual stick figures drawing")

This was not a "drawing," but a cartoon. The distinction is important, as the purpose of a cartoon is different from that of a "drawing" and therefore how one assesses the content is potentially different one from the other.

Also note that Ms. Vinch seeing the cartoon 'for the first time' in the proofs is neither abnormal nor surreptitious. She saw everything we printed in the paper for the first time when she looked at proofs, because she wasn't around when we were doing all of the work laying out and editing the paper.-Ted

OK, I take that back, apparently Vinch did occasionally see articles before they were laid out (see Vinch dep. p. 58). -Ted

#50

• The Sexual stick figures drawing submitted for publication in the January 5, 2005 issue of The Tattler was not the first drawing created to accompany the "Alumni Advice: Sex is fun!" article

#51

• The first drawing created to accompany the "Alumni Advice:Sex is fun!" article depicted a teacher standing in a health classroom pointing to a board, and on the board was a woman performing oral sex on a man

#52

• The Tattler's Photography Editor solicited Ben McKee to create a drawing to accompany the article, "Alumni Advice: Sex is fun!"

#53

• Upon reviewing the first drawing submitted by Ben McKee for the article "Alumni Advice: Sex is fun!", The Tattler's Photography Editor deemed the drawing inappropriate

#54

• The Tattler's Photography Editor sent an email to the Editor-in-Chief expressing her opinion that the first drawing submitted by Ben McKee for the article "Alumni Advice: Sex is fun!", The Tattler's was inappropriate

-??? What if these strange twists of grammar and syntax mean something?

#55

• A second drawing was solicited from Ben McKee to accompany the article "Alumni Advice: Sex is Fun!"

#56

• The second drawing received by The Tattler from Ben McKee for the article "Alumni Advice: Sex is fun!" was the same as the first drawing submitted, except that the woman performing the oral sex was removed, and stick figures engaged in sexual positions were put in the woman's place

-This is disingenuous, as saying it is the "same, except..." is equivalent to saying that the second cartoon was, in fact, different from the first. One could characterize the second as being completely different from the first.

#57

• The article "Alumni Advice: Sex is fun!" was written by a former IHS student who was now a college freshman Jacob Shiffrin

- Can the ICSD not afford a proofreader? (Or a fact-checker: Jacob Shiffrin was a Sophomore at the time of his submission)

#58

• After reviewing the article "Alumni Advice: Sex is fun!" article and the Sexual stick figures drawing on her proof set, Ms. Vinch crossed out both

#59

• The purpose of Ms. Vinch crossing out the article "Alumni Advice: Sex is fun!" article and the Sexual stick figures drawing on her proof set was to indicate to the students that neither would be published in The Tattler

This seems important to me - there is a big difference between indicating that something needs refinement and/or merits further discussion and indicating 'that neither would be published.' -Ms. Bach

#60

• Ms. Vinch crossed out the article "Alumni Advice: Sex is fun!" article and the Sexual stick figures drawing on her proof set due to their lewd, vulgar and obscene nature

#61

• The issue of The Tattler in which the article "Alumni Advice: Sex is fun!" and the Sexual stick figures drawing were to be printed went to press without any formal appeal by the editors of The Tattler to the Faculty Advisor's decision

Why was there no formal appeal? I wasn't privy to that stuff, but my guess is time constraints would have rendered an appeal moot. Does it run deeper than that? Did a formal appeal process even exist for Tattler-related issues at the time? -Ted

No, it was just time constraints. It was the end of the year, we were almost ready to begin layout. -Andrew

No to both of you, my (rob's) decision was based on the fact that after January a February issue was due out, with a "Love" centerspread where both would be more appropriate and discussion could continue the following month. Also, the article was solicited by Andrew but appeared in Kristen Tauer's Features section. She did not see the article until her proofs, and she had some concerns with it, that contributed to my decision to hold off a month (see the sex cartoons packet I prepared for documentation) -Rob

#62

When the January 5, 2005 issue of The Tattler was distributed throughout the ICSD and the Ithaca community, there was faculty, student and community concern relating to its content

Has this concern ever been quantified? I remember one big issue among us was that everyone was telling us people in the community were pissed off, but no one ever actually told us who (apart from the letter we received from Ardelle Alling). All the concern was among IHS faculty. I certainly never heard a student complaining. -Ted

#63

Concern stemmed from the January 5, 2005 issue of The Tattler as a result of an article that appeared in a "center-spread" of the issue entitled "Academic Dishonesty at IHS"

#64

An article that appeared in a "center-spread" of the issue entitled "Academic Dishonesty at IHS" mentioned one teacher by name as a teacher in whose class cheating could be accomplished

#65

After the publication of the January 5, 2005 issue of The Tattler, ICSD became aware of the fat that two freshman students had submitted a plagarized assignment to a teacher as part of an investigation for the academic dishonesty center-spread

Jarrah incident: See D00633-D00635. More importantly, see Jarrah's email!!! Jarrah's dad wasn't too happy with the conclusion D00750

ALSO NOTE that this type of surreptition is allowed by the ICSD's beloved Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics: "Avoid undercover or other surreptitious methods of gathering information except when traditional open methods will not yield information vital to the public. Use of such methods should be explained as part of the story."

And of course we planned to explain it. We need to emphasize that this was an investigation of a) the quality of online story-plagarizing sites, a topic that has been covered EXTENSIVELY in the mainstream press, and b) an investigation of the ability of teachers to DETECT plagiarism INSAMUCH it is an indicator of teacher quality and NOT as a "how-to" guide. The latter is how the ICSD saw it, but not even remotely close to how we intended it. We can get citations for a) but for b)... it seems like our best shot would be to point out that we are (/were) extremely good students (extremely good WRITERS) with no desire or need to plagiarize (online papers = low quality) and only a journalistic desire (also the desire to investigat the powers that be as represented by our coverage of Wilson). As for a), I think we can note our unique perspective and ability as students.

stories about online plagiarism that looked interesting:

"If This Were a Term Paper, You Might Have Seen It on the Web" LA Times FRONT PAGE! 6/17/2006

"SCHOOLS SET MOUSE TRAPS FOR COPYCATS" FRONT PAGE 4/30/06 about anti-plagiarism efforts at schools, and "ONLINE PLAGIARISM STRIKES BLOG WORLD" 5/8/06, both from Boston Globe

"Schools Turn to Software to Help Stop Plagiarism" 4/15/04, Washington Post

"TEACHERS FIGHT HIGH-TECH CHEATERS/HIGH SCHOOLS GET SAVVY ON STOPPING PLAGIARISM, WAYWARD NET USE" 2/27/05 (note date!) Boston Globe

"Homework Helper", magazine article, Washington Post (the sunday magazine), 9/15/02

"Educators, Cheating Students Rely on Web; More Schools Use Plagiarism-Tracking Software" Washington Post, 11/27/03

"Pasting the Grade: As kids go online for the facts, cheating has never been more tempting" Newsweek, 8/25/03

#66

The students who submitted a plagarized assignment to a teacher as part of an investigation for the academic dishonesty had been assigned the task by the editors of The Tattler

NO---they volunteered!!!!

#67

The purpose of submitting a plagarized assignment to a teacher as part of an investigation for the academic dishonesty was to see if the teacher could later detect the submission of the plagarized work

#68

The written assignment the students who submitted the plagiarized assignment to a teacher as part of an investigation for the academic dishonesty received assured the students that they would not be disciplined for their actions

???? Is this miscopied ???? It makes no sense... -Ms. Bach

Well, the "A" and "D" of academic dishonesty are capitalized in the original, but the rest is copied verbatim...It's a good thing Mr. Quesnel hasn't brought up Hazelwood's "ungrammatical" clause yet! -Rob

#69

The students who submitted a plagarized assignment to a teacher as part of an investigation for the academic dishonesty later admitted to the act, which constituted an act of academic dishonesty, and were subsuquently disciplined for their actions

It was not academic dishonesty; it was journalism. Jarrah/Lily wrote the actual assignment (and even turned it in); the intention was not malicious. The teacher, Colleen Ledley, was a very poor choice and thought that she was being attacked by the students (she's a real hothead)

#70

Another article appearing in the January 5, 2005 issue of The Tattler entitled "Ralph's Ribs, meh", received public and faculty outcry when the content of the article, including references to "smackin' a ho," "colla greens," and "pinpin cane" were deemed racist

Being "deemed racist" is the critique of some, but not all. The students who wrote the article, perhaps naively, were immersed in a different cultural context in which such vocabulary was not considered racist.

To say the article "was deemed racist" is misleading. It was read by many people before publication, including Ms. Vinch. She did not deem the article racist at that time, nor did any other editor. Also, to insinuate that hoes and pimps are soleley regulated to African-American culture is racist in of itself. Hoes and pimps are a part of any culture; white, black, Asian, European, Indian, etc. And 'colla greens' is not a phrase used solely by African-Americans, either: rather, it is used by most people who speak with a Southern accent. The fact that the article appeared to a select few as racist was unfortunate, but because a few people believe something is true does not make it so. -Ted

The two authors of the article didn't find it racist, the section editor (Kristen Tauer) didn't think it was racist, the copy editor didn't think it was racist, the editor-in-chief didn't find it racist, and the advisor didn't find it racist...

#71

Several days after the publication of the article entitled "Ralph's Ribs: meh", the District received a letter from staff at Ralph's Ribs

Perhaps we should note that once the Tattler got ahold of this letter, the authors of the article felt terrible about unknowingly writing something that someone could percieve as racist. The authors wrote an apology which was presented in person to one of the proprietors of the restaurant. The authors also printed a formal apology in the very next issue of the Tattler. The District is implying that we had no responsibility, which is untrue. The authors assumed complete responsibility for offending a few people in such a way, and took quick action to rectify the situation. Finally, perhaps we should note that the review was also negative towards the food served at the restaurant, which may have induced anger in its employees more than the few allegedly racist comments. (I think the letter reflects this; do we still have a copy?) -Ted

#72

The letter the District received in response to the article "Ralph's Ribs: meh" expressed, among other things, that the employees deemed the article as having racial slurs and overtones which rose to the level of hurtful, if not hateful

#74

At the meeting where Ms Vinch stated her intention to resign as faculty advisor, Dr. Russell and Mr. Wilson tried to convince Ms. Vinch not to resign as Faculty Advisor

Note that vinch never told US that she wanted to resign... and indeed, never really told us that she resigned. It was, what, a message on Rob's voicemail? Very rude.

Ms. Vinch didn't tell us a lot of things. She never told us that she believed she had the final decision regarding content (Vinch dep. p.45, et. al.). She never told us she thought the problem between her and Rob was so bad that she was discussing guidelines with the administration. She also never told us she wanted to resign. Finally, she never told us back in June of '04 that she was considering canceling our final issue; she didn't discuss that decision with us at all, which prevented her from hearing why that stupid personals ad got in the paper in the first place. WHY DO ADULTS FEEL THAT THEY HAVE NO NEED TO TALK TO KIDS??? Students get no respect; they are instantly deemed unable to understand. This kind of thing is so frustrating. Don't they teach people about this stuff in education school? Or do they just teach you how to manipulate young impressionable minds to do your bidding? -Ted

Psychologically, it seems that if she wanted to resign, she wouldn't have scheduled a meeting... the only reason for scheduling a meeting to issue a resignation is to give the other side an opportunity to convince you not to resign. Dunno if her mind goes that deep.

#75

At the meeting where Ms Vinch stated her intention to resign as faculty advisor, Ms. Vinch stated that she felt that written guidelines would help her understand what was expected from her by the administration and the District concerning her role as Faculty Advisor

#76

At the meeting where Ms Vinch stated her intention to resign as faculty advisor Ms. Vinch provided Dr. Russell with a draft of guidelines she believed represented her understanding of the role of Faculty Advisor, as well as the District's expectations from the Faculty Advisor

Ms. Vinch repeatedly denies ever presenting the district with a set of guidlines (see her dep. et. al, esp. p. 89). She only suggested them to Russell as a possible solution. She never admits to writing an actual draft, and also denies ever seeing the guidelines before that fateful meeting with Troy, Troisi, and Vann. Yet the draft exists! We got it from Wilson in our final document request (filing cabinet raid...how did they miss a giant file that said "Tattler" on it? D00652 -Ted

#77

After Dr. Russell was provided with a draft guidelines Ms. Vinch believed represented her understanding of the role of the Faculty Advisor, as well as District's expectations from the Faculty Advisor, Dr. Russell took Ms. Vinch's draft guidelines and began to work with ICSD's counsel Bond Schoeneck and King, PLLC (hereinafter "District Counsel") to create formal, written guidelines

#78

The guidelines created by Dr. Russell with the assistance of the District's counsel were intended to codify the ICSD's prior practices with respect to the Tattler

no they weren't---they were intended to "improve the quality of the newspaper" "

Wilson: "The editors have been across the line in previous issues, and, had any conceivable set of guidelines been in place should, could, would have either been disciplined post facto or censored in advance" D00681.

Self-serving ("prior practices"?), and not true. Prior practices need to be critiqued to show how the proposed guidelines deviated from prior practice.

Deviation from prior practice is evident at the outset by stating that one issue per month will be published. I remember saying I'd never agree to that because it is an ideal that cannot be guaranteed since it is dependent upon advertising revenues, among other factors. I think we were able to publish monthly ONE year... but the morgue can show the extent to which that is true. -Ms. Bach

#79

On or about January 21, 2005, Dr. Russell and Mr. Wilson met with the editors of The Tattler and Ms Vinch, and provided them with copies of the guidelines

Note the intimidating preceding meeting with ex-football player Johnny Vann, whose former high school had prior review of their newspaper.

along with no offer to negotiate!!! Bill Russell says so himself, D00559.

#80

• In late January, 2005, The Tattler's editors sought to publish, for the second time, the Sexual stick figures drawing in the February, 2005 issue of The Tattler

- Rob decided in light of discussions with Stephenie Vinch about the Jacob Shiffrin article titled "Alumni Advice: Sex is Fun" to postpone considerations of the article and accompanying cartoon for the February issue's "love" centerspread (RMO dep p.231, Vinch dep p.67), so "for the second time" is incorrect, as the February Issue was the first when student editors sought to publish the cartoon.

#81

• The Tattler's editors sought to publish the Sexual stick figures drawing to accompany an article discussing health education at the ICSD entitled "How is sex being taught in our health class?"

- article was titled "How is sex being taught in our health classes" (feb 2 issue) - drawing / cartoon distinction - it is relevant that this was within a two-page, thematically-grouped centerspread titled "love"

#82

• The article entitled 'How is sex being taught in our health class?' was a serious article

- name of article wrong (see above) - what does this mean? Are they implying that a serious article cannot be introduced with humor? Maybe they should look at the Week in Review section of the New York Times, or any opinion section of any newspaper, for that matter, and see that serious articles are accompanied by humorous drawings all the time. -Ted

ted has a very good point--week in review. publications use photo illustrations all the time. in fact, for chris beyers' op-ed on the Food Nazi incident, i asked Ben to draw something funny (and he came up with a sketch of a food gas chamber, which we published)

#83

• Ms. Vinch refused to allow the Sexual stick figures drawing be published in the February, 2005 issue of The Tattler

- drawing / cartoon?

Note that this time, she contradicts herself: she says first that she thought it was "obscene or not appropriate for the audience" (p.108), but later she says that in a discussion with Mr. Wilson: "He asked me what I thought and I told him I didn't think it was appropriate for high school newspaper. I thought it was in poor taste and he said I agree, I support your decision not to run it" (p. 114). DIDN'T THINK IT WAS APPROPRIATE is not obscene. -Ted

#84

• On or about January 31, 2005, Mr. Ochshorn sent a letter to Mr. Wilson formally appealing Ms. Vinch's decision not to allow publication of the Sexual stick figures drawing under the ICSD's Student Grievance Procedures

- it was a two-part appeal: (1) appealing the decision to censor the cartoon; and (2) appealing the guidelines under which the cartoon was censored (the appeal itself, RMO dep p. 244)

#85

• The February 2, 2005 issue of The Tattler was printed with an empty box next to the 'How is sex being taught in our health class?' article

- name of article (above) - the box was within, not next to the article, and it was not completely empty. the box contained the text "<Image censored. A cartoon providing commentary on sex education was deleted by The Tattler advisor. Editors are currently appealing the decision.>" (feb 2 tattler, p.15)

#86

• On or about February 9, 2005, Mr. Wilson sent a letter to Mr. Ochshorn advising him that his appeal was denied.

- ok - note that Joe Wilson's notes from our appeal hearing are D00649-D00650

#87

• On or about February 15, 2005, Mr. Ochshorn sent a letter to Superintendent of Schools for the ICSD Judith Pastel ... formally appealing Mr. Wilson's decision per the ICSD Student Grievance Procedures

- ok

#88

• On or about February 3, 2005, Ms. Vinch formally resigned as Faculty Advisor of The Tattler

- ok

#89

• As a result of not having a faculty advisor, The Tattler could not publish another issue of The Tattler until a new faculty advisor was appointed pursuant to the 2004-2005 School conduct Manual for the ICSD, Section III(A)(1)

- it's interesting to look at The Tattler as falling under these provisions ("CO-CURRICULAR AND EXTRACURRICULAR PROGRAMS::STUDENT ACTIVITIES::Extracurricular Activities and Clubs") for several reasons.

Consider the following:

• The rules are under the heading "Extracurricular Activities and Clubs," implying that The Tattler is an extracurricular activity (which, of course, it is)
• Also in these guidelines for "Extracurricular Acitivities and Clubs," the following: "Student groups are responsible for making clear to the public that their programs to not necessarily reflect the views of their School as a whole."
• Also: "A student group has the right to a hearing before a decision is reached to ban, discontinue, or discipline it."

- In fact, it was the illegal guidelines imposed on The Tattler the previous month that explicitly forbade publication of The Tattler without an advisor: "No issue of The Tattler may be sent to the printer without final approval of the advisor." (jan guidelines, Wilson dep p.55)

This is an excellent example of the District's hypocrisy. -Ted

#90

• After Ms. Vinch resigned, the student publishers of The Tattler decided to create an independent student newspaper eventually called The March Issue

- Student "publishers" of the tattler? Editors are not the same as publishers.

#91

• The March Issue looked nearly identical to The Tattler, contained articles written by The Tattler's editors and staff, and used the same advertisers as The Tattler

- we started from scratch with advertisers, and set up several new accounts with advertisers who had never advertised in The Tattler previously including:

• certified properties of tompkins county
• napoli pizza
• ithaca bakery
• ithaca paintball

(the march issue, rob affdvt(?))

- many advertisers who were advertising with The Tattler in february for one reason or another did not continue advertising with the march issue:

• upper level hairstyling
• autumn leaves used books
• varna auto service
• big red driving school
• true insurance
• gimme coffee
• italian carry out
• head to toe salon

- in fact, only learning foundation and lightlink ads appeared in both the February tattler and the March Issue.

- The March issue did not look "nearly identical" to the tattler, as it said "the march issue" on its masthead, rather than "The Tattler." Both had columns, text, and images, as they were both newspapers. To the extent that both were newspapers, they had, of necessity, a certain family resemblance. Templates and fonts completely were changed.

#92

• On or about March 3, 2005, Mr. Ochshorn wrote a letter to Dr. Russell notifying him of The March Issue's staff's intention to distribute their independent newspaper on ICSD grounds

- ok

#93

• On or about March 8, 2005, Superintendent Pastel sent a letter to Mr. Ochshorn notifying him that permission to distribute The March Issue on ICSD grounds was denied

- ok

#94

• Superintendent Pastel denied permission to distribute The March Issue on ICSD grounds because The March Issue contained the same Sexual stick figures drawing that was previously denied publication in the February 2, 2005 issue of The Tattler

- not just this (see 95)

#95

• Superintendent Pastel denied permission to distribute The March Issue on ICSD grounds because The March Issue contained privileged mental health information about a faculty member

- her words were "personal health information," not "privileged." (Pastel's letter.) That a school program was suffering as a result of admittedly "personal" problems a school employee was dealing with made that information newsworthy. Newspapers know no "privileged information"--even if the ICSD was not legally permitted to release this information, it had become common knowledge (students in the program were told of it, and it spread beyond those students, to even a tattler editor who did no investigative work for the story and was not connected to the program--RMO dep 257, AMHA dep 130-131) and there is no reason it could be denied release in a newspaper.

I don't believe you would have been able to verify what was 'common knowledge'; information about an individual's health cannot be divulged without the express permission of the individual. Even one's spouse cannot receive information from a medical provider without the spouse specifying IN WRITING that health information can be released to the spouse. Your parents cannot receive information from a medical provider about your health records unless you specify IN WRITING that information may be released to them. Privacy is paramount in medical matters, and reporting mere rumor is dangerous. -Ms. Bach

Our decision to retract it notwithstanding... we talked to several people the next week at CSPA who thought that not only should we not have retracted it, we should have done an entire story on it––they thought that students having a teacher who was possibly mentally unstable was certainly newsworthy. About a month later, I met the publisher of the Ithaca Journal, who had apparently heard about the incident, and he was (to my utter embarrassment) quite impressed––"just keep doing what you're doing," he said. -Andrew

#96

• On March 8, 2005, Mr. Ochshorn sent a letter to Superintendent Pastel rescinding his request to distribute The March Issue as a result of the personal health information, expressing his willingness to remove the confidential mental health information.

- as above, "confidential" may not be the case--the information was already widely known at the time - based on #97, below, this seems to be about the first letter to Pastel, which in fact stressed that releasing this information "is an ethical rather than a legal issue" (the march 8 letter). it was the second letter that stated our intention to reprint that spread, for largely procedural reasons (i.e. that the editor, not the reporter, had inserted the information, in direct violation of an agreement the author made with her sources--see second letter). (RMO dep 259)

#97

• On March 8, 2005, Mr. Ochshorn sent a second letter to Superintendent Pastel challenging her decision to deny distribution of The March Issue as a result of the Sexual stick figures drawing

- requesting an legally satisfactory justification for censorship on the grounds of the cartoon

#98

• On March 9, 2005, Superintendent Pastel sent a letter to Mr. Ochshorn in recognition of his March 8, 2005 correspondence, reconfirming her decision to deny distribution of The March Issue based on the fact that it included the Sexual stick figures drawing

- ...and resting that denial on the cartoon alone

#99

• On March 9, 2005, Superintendent Pastel sent Mr. Ochshorn a letter formally denying The Tattler's appeal of Ms. Vinch's decision to not allow publication of the Sexual stick figures drawing in the February 2, 2005 issue of The Tattler

- the appeal was two part (see #84)

#100

• The student publishers of The March Issue created two more independent student newspapers which they called The April Issue and The May Issue

- ok

#101

• The publishers of The April Issue and The May Issue sought permission to distribute those newspapers on ICSD grounds

- ok

#102

• The ICSD granted the publishers of The April Issue and The May Issue permission to distribute The April Issue and The May Issue on ICSD grounds

- ok

#103

• In March and April of 2005, the District posted, as available, the position of Faculty Advisor for The Tattler

- ...and attached their illegal guidelines to the posting (TODO: document)

#104

• After interviewing several applicants for the position of Faculty Advisor for The Tattler, Roselyn Teukolsky was offered the position of Faculty Advisor for The Tattler

- two applicants, but ok

#105

• On May 11, 2005 Roselyn Teukolsky accepted the position of Faculty Advisor for The Tattler

- ok

#106

• Roselyn Teukolsky is currently the Faculty Advisor for The Tattler

- ok

#107

• Once Roselyn Teukolsky became the Faculty Advisor in May of 2005, the student publishers of The Tattler were once again permitted to use The Tattler name, office, and IHS resources

- again, that it was shut down without a hearing was in violation of the 2004-2005 School conduct Manual for the ICSD, Section III(A)(1) (see #89), but ok?

#108

• On or about June 3, 2005, eight of the student editors of The Tattler for the 2004-2005 academic year filed a Complaint dated June 10, 2005 with the Northern District Court of New York

- ok?

#109

• On or about June 8, 2005, The Tattler printed and distributed a final issue of The Tattler for the 2004-2005 academic school year

- printing and distributing don't occur simultaneously, but ok?

#110

• The June 8, 2005 issue of The Tattler was published by the same student editors of 2004-2005 issues of The Tattler, The March Issue, The April Issue and The May Issue, who are now Plaintiffs in this action

- ambiguous phrasing. while all plaintiffs in this lawsuit were editors for all the listed publications, some Tattler editors did not work on The Issue (Fattaruso dep 84)

Also, some editors who worked on the Tattler before Feb. are not Plantiffs, specifically that one girl who did our ads...Stephanie? I forget. - Ted

Re: Ted -- Ad Manager Stephanie Chu, Webmaster Yan Wang, Business Manager Noreen Rizvi, Activities Editor Ruth Ezra, and Office Manager Scott Zuccarino did not for one reason or another sign on to the case...

#111

• The June 8, 2005 issue of The Tattler was published under the guidelines the Plaintiffs challenge through this action

- yes, BUT with Teukolsky acting as a buffer (Teuk dep 18) between us and the guidelines

#112

• There is no claim that any material was censored or removed from the June 8 2005 issue of The Tattler under the guidelines

- see #111, above. Teukolsky acted as buffer.

#113

• The June 8, 2005 issue of The Tattler contained a front page article about the suit entitled "Tattler editors file suit to stop censorship"

- actually, because of conflict of interest, we didn't treat it like a normal "front page article" and published it without a byline in a box, more as an informational note than an article. in fact, we published directly the press release we were providing to other news outlets.

#114

• The June 8, 2005 issue of The Tattler contained numerous articles, editorials and commentaries about the controversy surrounding The Tattler in 2004-2005

- ok?

#115

• A meeting occurred between several of the Plaintiffs and their counsel Raymond Schlather, and members of the 2005-2006 Editorial Board for The Tattler

- No. I (rob) went to a tattler meeting to speak about the lawsuit (RMO dep 66) without Ray's attendance. Then, at least three members of the 05-06 board who wanted to join the case came to a meeting at Ray's office (that I also attended), some with their parents. Ray might have more documentation/explanation here...

#116

• A purpose of the meeting between several of the Plaintiffs and their counsel Raymond Schlather, and members of the 2005-2006 Editorial Board for The Tattler was to solicit the members of the 2005-2006 Editorial Board of The Tattler to become Plaintiffs in this action

- see above (115)

#117

• None of the 2005-2006 members of The Tattler Editorial Board agreed to join this action as Plaintiffs

- well, their parents didn't (see above).

#118

• After reviewing the Sexual stick figures drawing, Ms. Vinch spoke to other faculty members, including Ms. Bach and Kenneth Pickens, then Chair of the English Department, concerning the Sexual stick figures drawing

#119

• The faculty members Ms. Vinch spoke to about the Sexual stick figures drawing agreed with her assessment that it was obscene.

- No way! I can't speak for Mr. Pickens, but Ms. Bach did not see the cartoon as obscene. IN FACT, when she was supervising production of the controversial January Tattler--because, as usual, Ms. Vinch was unable to attend production (RMO dep 231)--she expressed to me (Rob) confusion over Ms. Vinch's adamant stance against publication of the cartoon.

To the best of my ability to recall how this unfolded, Ms. Vinch told me of the cartoon but did not show it to me - this was probably a phone conversation. I may well have said it SOUNDED like it would be classified as obscene. When her daughter was ill and I provided supervision of production one evening, Rob SHOWED me the cartoon, which made clear that the images were stick figures, and we discussed the tripartite test for obscenity. I said that while the cartoon might appeal to the prurient interest of an immature minor, that the cartoon clearly was intended as commentary on the article about sex education in health class and therefore had a valid place in the centerspread. -Ms. Bach

#120

• Superintendent Pastel felt that distribution of the stick figures drawing would be offensive to many students and confusing to others, particularly immature students whose understanding of, and views about sexual relations are not fully formed

- So what if she did?

#121

• Superintendent Pastel felt that distribution of the Sexual stick figures drawing on school grounds would interfere with the teaching of the current health curriculum, in particular, that sexual relations is a matter to be taken seriously and abstinence

- "...to be taken seriously and abstinence"???? not only is it a nonsensical end of a sentence, but promoting abstinence doesn't sound very content neutral.

- This is patently absurd. Saying the cartoon would interfere with teaching the health course is clearly bogus, especially as the cartoon was, in fact, distributed to many students, and no such interference or disruption occurred. To take something seriously does not preclude critique through a cartoon; this in fact, is the whole point of political cartoons which, by definition, deal with "serious" matters. In fact, this paragraph is a clear admission by the administration that they were censoring the cartoon based on its content, rather than because it was obscene (it is clearly not obscene). The cartoon was making a commentary on the gap between students' and teachers' perceptions of the role of sex and sexual education in their lives; it was this commentary that the administration objected to and censored. This motivation is expressed in Pastel's claim that "sexual relations is a matter to be taken seriously..." and so forth. She is clearly upset that the implicit message of the cartoon challenges her point of view, NOT that the cartoon is obscene.

#122

• Superintendent Pastel's concerns relating to the Sexual stick figures drawing were heightened as a result of the sexual activity that was occurring with ICSD students at that time

#123

• At the time Superintendent Pastel was considering the Sexual stick figures drawing, she had received reports of middles [sic] school student [sic] attending parties where the boys stood in a line while the girls went down the line orally "servicing" them

It is completely unclear whether these were concrete reports of actual, specific incidents happening with ICSD students OR just vague speculation and heresay based on the hysteria surrounding oral sex that has been paranozzling the country for the last five or so years.

A good treatment of this (Rob--this is where I got the idea from) is the Jan 2006 Atlantic Monthly article: http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200601/oral-sex

from the atlantic: "When I first began hearing these stories [about oral sex parties, etc.], I was convinced that we were in the grips of a nationwide urban legend … In talking with people, I found only one verifiable account of a girl servicing more than one boy at a party. But the army of school administrators and teachers and parents and girls I spoke with convincingly reported an astonishing change in the sexual behavior of middle- and upper-middle-class girls [how did they know?!?!?]. Fellatio, which was once a part of the sexual repertoire only of experienced women, is now commonly performed by very young girls outside of romantic relationships, casually and without any expectation of reciprocation [yeah, I wish.] ."

Here's David Brooks of the New York Times (4/17/05 - note date), with the same viewpoint:

"You see the febrile young teens in their skintight spaghetti strap tank tops with their acres of exposed pelvic skin. You hear 50 Cent's ode to oral sex, Candy Shop, throbbing from their iPods. You open the college newspapers and see the bawdy sex columns; at William and Mary last week I read a playful discussion of how to fondle testicles and find G spots. You could get the impression that America's young people are leading lives of Caligulan hedonism. You could give credence to all those parental scare stories about oral sex parties at bar mitzvahs and junior high school dances. You could worry about hookups, friends with benefits, and the rampant spread of casual, transactional sexuality. But it turns out you'd be wrong. The fact is, sex is more explicit everywhere -- on Desperate Housewives, on booty-quaking music videos, on the Internet -- except in real life. As the entertainment media have become more sex-saturated, American teenagers have become more sexually abstemious. … Half of all high school boys now say they are virgins, up from 39 percent in 1990. Reports of an epidemic of teenage oral sex are also greatly exaggerated. There's very little evidence to suggest it is really happening. Meanwhile, teenagers' own attitudes about sex are turning more conservative. There's been a distinct rise in the number of teenagers who think casual sex is wrong. There's been an increase in the share of kids who think teenagers should wait until adulthood before getting skin to skin. When you actually look at the intimate life of America's youth, you find this heterodoxical pattern: people can seem raunchy on the surface but are wholesome within. There are Ivy League sex columnists who don't want anybody to think they are loose. There are foul-mouthed Maxim readers terrified they will someday divorce, like their parents. Eminem hardly seems like a paragon of traditional morality, but what he's really angry about is that he comes from a broken home, and what he longs for is enough suburban bliss to raise his daughter."

In fairness, my fifteen minutes of research countered my three years of experience and showed that there is some convincing evidence that oral sex is on the rise. (Of course, I don't agree with the ICSD's predicate that increased oral sex is wrong; one article I read took an economic viewpoint and suggested teens were fellating as a safer and baby-free alternative to coitus.)

This article is REALLY interesting: http://www.slate.com/id/2148583

SO OVERALL I think Pastel's viewpoint is based on fear and not fact. But that's more of a philosophical argument, and I don't see how we can effectively argue that. Pastel: "I think kids are having sex!" Us: "We think kids aren't having sex!" Neither side has hard evidence. The ICSD has the upper hand, I think, because they at least have a web of similarly hysteric people who will make the same claims and whom they can cite reciprocally. It's nice to have David Brooks & the Atlantic on our side philosophically, but they can't claim relevance to the ICSD.

#124

• At the time Superintendent Pastel was considering the Sexual stick figures drawing, she had received reports that the female students told adults their actions did not constitute "sex"

well, you can't really get pregnant from a blowjob, can you, judy? maybe you don't know that because, as you revealed in your deposition, you are not a certified health teacher.

also, i really hate how this is supposed to be all material factsy but that this sentence is TOTALLY loaded with the insinuation that oral sex is "sex".

#125

• At the time Superintendent Pastel was considering the Sexual stick figures drawing, she had received reports that some students allegedly were being recruited and pressured to engage in group sex and sexual behavior with multiple partners

#126

• In response to the District's concern over students engaging in risky sexual behavior and drug use, a letter was sent to parents of ICSD secondary students advising them of the reports the District had received

Imagine how much they must have spent on postage... let's say they send one letter per kid and get a bulk rate of, I dunno, thirty cents a letter. 5500 kids => almost $2000. I don't want to sound like one of those letter-to-the-editor writers who criticizes the ICSD for spending tax money period, but...

#127

• The Tattler masthead identifies "Ithaca High School", the address of IHS, as well as an email address, www.ihstattler.com

- OK, first of all, "www.ihstattler.com" is a web page, not an e-mail address--and one that was hosted off District grounds by Lightlink Internet through a deal arranged by student editors.

- Secondly, the "masthead" on the cover is an abridged version of the full masthead, generally found with the editorial on the second page. This masthead not only established The Tattler explicitly as an "open forum" soliciting opinion pieces and letters "from all members of the community," but did list an actual email address for these submissions: editor@ihstattler.com (i.e. the STUDENT editor) -- see any Tattler up to February, when, sadly, we were no longer an open forum

#128

• The Tattler does not contain any statements which disassociate The Tattler from the ICSD

In the Masthead (p.2)

• "...the student-run newspaper of Ithaca High School"
• The entire staff, save the faculty advisor, has graduation dates next to their names, indicating that they are students

Other Clues

• It would be strange for an ICSD publication to file FOIL requests against the ICSD

OTHER THAN THE PAINFULLY OBVIOUS, any other good examples?

Perhaps stuff on the opinion and editorial pages? Did we have a diclaimer stating that the opinions expressed were that of the authors and not of the school district? If not, we should have. - Ted

There should be multiple issues in the morgue that include a disclaimer on the masthead that what is printed in the Tattler represents only the writer's opinion and does not represent the ICSD; I know that statement (along with the express statement that The Tattler is an open forum) was sometimes cut as editors wanted larger fonts for their names, etc. But it should be there, at least sporadically even though it should have been a constant. I'll try to look. -Ms. Bach

#129

• The Tattler is referred to as "The IHS Tattler" inside each issue

- ...and, much as the Ithaca Journal is produced in Ithaca with a focus on Ithaca, The Tattler is produced by Ithaca High School Students, with a focus somewhat on Ithaca High School. Likewise The Cornell Daily Sun or VIRTUALLY ANY OTHER newspaper.

- note also that this was a debate within the 04-05 staff about whether to refer to us ourselves as The Tattler or The IHS Tattler. a majority agreed that with distribution in the community it would be useful to place our publication as one relevant to Ithaca High School news and events, hence "The IHS Tattler"

#130

• Each issue of The Tattler states that The Tattler that it is "...the student-run newspaper of the Ithaca High School."

- misquote: it should be "...the student-run newspaper of Ithaca High School"

#131

• The March Issue, The April Issue and The May Issue each contain a disclaimer stating the publication is "[n]ot affilliated with or funded by the Ithaca High School"

#132

• Ms. Bach stated in a letter dated February 11, 2005 to Dr. Russell that "The Tattler does have an impact on how the community views the school and the work we do, and it deserves greater support in order to do the kind of job it can do well and we all wish to see represent us."

- it's unclear from this quote who "us" is--perhaps "us" is the students and faculty of Ithaca High School?

- further, this is taken completely out of context. consider the sentence that follows the quotation:

"Rather than quibble over Hazelwood vs Tinker language (and I most certainly favor Tinker if we wish students to take responsibility for their work), let's allow students and teachers to use the school newspaper as a learning tool by allotting sufficient resources in order to do the job well."

#133

• Ms. Bach stated in a letter to Dr. Russell dated February 11, 2005 that "[w]hen I taught Journalism, we always used articles from the class for the paper, but the course operated as a feeder for stories and training ground for potential editors."

- again, taken out of context. bach can clarify in affidavit... a following sentence:

"I often had one or two editors in the class, but no editorial decisions were ever made in the class."

You might want to include the number of editors (at a given point in time) who had ever taken the class.

I can go into more detail but in short, the point is that the course was only loosely associated with the paper. For example, the entire class went to lunch at the Moosewood and wrote restaurant reviews, but only one was selected for publication. I can count on one hand (and name) all the editors who ever took the class (Esi Sogah, Liesle Sachse, Andrew Schwager., Cara Roseberg.). The first two were editors when they enrolled in the class, and the second two became editors after they took the class. -Ms. Bach - I think both Matt and Mike Pochily took the class and both wrote for The Tattler at some point - but there were never more than two students from each Journalism class who became staff members, though several had work published in The Tattler.

It is worth noting that the Dow Jones workshop I attended at Indiana State in Bloomington was organized for the purpose of linking Journalism classes to the AP Language exam in order to entice editors to take the elective courses which tend to be populated with less academic students. About ten teachers nationwide were accepted to this summer program, and I was taken aback at this focus, but it was very clear that teachers were eager to add an AP label to Journalism electives. I may still have the materials, which were almost exclusively tied to the AP Language exam. - Ms. Bach

#134

• Editors of The Tattler have been given credit for their work on The Tattler

But also, they haven't been given credit... Put this in context.

The earliest date for credit (generally given in fractions...) would be 1998-1999. This ended in 2003 when I left. - Ms. Bach

#135

• Since at least 1996, the collective bargaining agreement between the ICSD and the Ithaca Teacher's Association has released the Faculty Advisor of The Tattler from one class assignment

#136

• Since at least 1979, The Tattler has never operated without a Faculty Advisor overseeing the production of the newspaper

#137

• The Tattler provides students at the IHS with an opportunity to learn journalism through a hands on experience

#138

• The Tattler is supervised by a Faculty Advisor who helps navigate the students through the often difficult ethical, professional and legal waters that one travels as a journalist

#139

• While The Tattler is a learning experience provided by the ICSD, it presents distinct concerns for the District, both legal and ethical, that student journalists often do not have the maturity or knowledge to understand, which requires an adult Faculty Advisor to have final say over The Tattler's content

requires an adult to have final say? this is not a "fact," is it? it sounds like a wish of the administration, rather than an established fact. Wasn't the reality more of a joint search for consensus than a "you do what I say" arrangement?

Who says we didn't have the faculty to understand legal and ethical issues? Is that a scientific fact? Commonly, the editors of the Tattler were some of the most academically accomplished students at IHS, most of whom were taking college-level courses. Regardless, it is offensive and untrue to say that teenagers are physically unable to understand law and ethics. Certainly, the advisor's job was to find these things that students may be unaware of, and explain the issue to the students, but the end result of explanation is commonly known to be understanding. It isn't like the adivsor would say some things and we would stare at her blankly, futilely struggling to comprehend this vast adult concept. More often than not, the advisor took it upon herself to refrain from explaining her decisions to us (see Vinch's letters to ICSD), already assuming (erroneously) that her decision was beyond the grasp of a 17-year-old. This is just ridiculous. It wasn't like 5th graders were running this thing. We were one or two years away from being legal adults. That doesn't mean we were retarded. -Ted

And frankly, Ms. Vinch was not very smart. -Andrew

And some of us were 18 when these events took place. -Trevor

#140

• Ms. Bach detailed the control she had exhibited over its production of The Tattler during her tenure as faculty advisor in her February 11, 2005 letter to Dr. Russell

I remember we discussed this extensively with Ms. Bach. As I recall, she said that she had maintained a strictly advisory role except for two occasions: the Wingdings incident, and the pothead teacher incident. In both of those cases, she took aim not to establish the Tattler as a Hazelwood paper (for the pothead teacher incident, didn't she advise the principal not to remove the identificatoin of his criminal charges, as that would force him to be liable for everything the paper printed thereafter?). I don't know what documentation we have regarding this; probably some e-mails from Ms. Bach. -Ted

The wingdings incident was about something that went to press and I fired editors for surreptitiously libeling the principal and two students. Libel cannot be allowed or condoned. I advised students NOT to print the pothead teacher incident as written (I was fine with their reporting on aspects of the case; it was not the topic that concerned me so much as the report as written, and the article was pulled by the principal due to the fact that the teacher in question would have distributed the paper to her second period class, since that was the short-lived experiment with moving homeroom to period two. I sent students to him as an appeals process, and he determined that having the teacher distribute the paper to her class would have disrupted the class and ended any hope of a lesson that day). -Ms. Bach

#141

• Ms. Bach stated in her February 11, 2005 letter to Dr. Russell that "if the newspaper is to be a tool to engage students in learning, they must take an active part"

True that. -Ted

#142

• Ms. Bach stated in her February 11, 2005 letter to Dr. Russell how refused to allow the publication of a story in The Tattler concerning the arrest of a teacher

We're missing a pronoun here...

#143

• Ms. Bach stated in her February 11, 2005 letter to Dr. Russell that she fired numerous editors for dereliction of duty and misconduct

Two editors, on one occasion: the aformentioned windgings incident. And we should note that said incident did not involve actual publication of misleading material, but the editors declaring (albeit unknowingly) their intent to publish libel. -Ted

#144

• Defendents, as well as non-party Ms. Vinch, have testified that they believed that the Faculty Advisor had final say over the content of The Tattler, and that the guidelines at issue merely codified this past practice of the ICSD

#148

• Mr. Wilson's concern was exacerbated by the fact that the drawing was intended to accompany an article about the ICSD's health education programs, which Mr. Wilson felt would give impressionable students and the community the impression that the District did not take sex education seriously, and that sex was not a serious subject

This is ridiculous, as the claim is being made that people reading the tattler, the "student" newspaper, would believe that it somehow represented the "District's" position about sex education. Many articles challenged the "district's" position on a range of subjects, yet this argument was not made for any other such article. It is only where the subject is "sex" that the issue is raised, since the District hopes that a general reluctance to deal with this particular issue will permit overt censorship that would otherwise be harder to justify with such a bogus claim (i.e., that people reading the Tattler would think that the District was not "serious" about whatever the article was discussing).

Good point. Was anyone ever afraid that "Chang and Eng" represented the District's opinion on, say, toilets (or whatever that inane article was about). Or did my column represent the District's opinion on laser tag? -Ted

#149

• Superintendent Pastel, who upheld the decisions of Ms. Vinch and Mr. Wilson with respect to the Sexual stick figures drawing, considered the drawing obscene, and that its distribution would be offensive to many students and confusing to others, particularly those immature students whose understanding of and views about sexual relations are not yet fully formed

Two claims here, each equally silly. First, the cartoon is not obscene. Second, many topics are offensive to various people, whether they are "immature" or not; that is not a justification for censorship. Inventing a class of "immature students whose understanding of and views about sexual relations are not yet fully formed" is similarly not a justification for censorship. Their political views are similarly immature and unformed; is that a reason to censor a political story or political cartoon? The only argument that could have merit in this context is that the cartoon is obscene, and it clearly is not.

#150

• Defendant Pastel concluded that any publication containing the drawing should not be distributed because it would interfere with the District's health curriculum which educates students that sexual relations are to be taken seriously

Again, the "interference" claim is clearly bogus, as subsequent events (i.e., the distribution of the March issue with the cartoon) have shown. Again, the idea that "serious" news cannot be critiqued with a cartoon is contradicted by the reality of political cartoons as a "serious" form of journalism.

#151

• The guidelines requested by Ms. Vinch have only been used by the Faculty Advisor, not the administration, to keep obscene content out of The Tattler

There has been no substantiation of the claim that the cartoon was, in fact, obscene. It wasn't. Therefore, saying it was obscene is untrue, and unsubstantiated. That 5 people say something is obscene doesn't make it obscene.

But does that absolve the administration of responsibility? They created the guidelines, and as such, an advisor who failed to follow them could be subsequently reprimanded by the District. I think the administration will at times be required to have an active role in enforcing the guidelines. -Ted

Wilson: "The editors have been across the line in previous issues, and, had any conceivable set of guidelines been in place should, could, would have either been disciplined post facto or censored in advance" D00681.

#152

• In May 2005 a revised version of the guidelines was distributed to Ms. Teukolsky and The Tattler staff.

I don't remember this... did this really happen? -Ted

#153

• The guidelines for The Tattler, as revised in May of 2005, provide the editors of The Tattler with a right to appeal any content-based decisions made by the Faculty Advisor

Wasn't this "right to appeal" mooted because it didn't establish any sort of expidited appeals structure that would fit with the schedule of a news publication? -Ted

#154

• The District has a policy concerning student publications

#155

• The District's rules for responsible journalism are detailed in Section IV (D) 2.18 of the 2004-2005 School Conduct Manual for the ICSD

#156

• The Tattler's distribution manager would deliver copies of The Tattler to IHS teacher and/or faculty mailboxes, to every home-room, to the cafeteria and courtyards o the IHS, the IHS library, would deliver ten (10) copies of each issue to the Board of Education mailbox of each elementary school

#157

• Plaintiff Ochshorn is not currently a student at IHS, is not currently a student at any ICSD school, is not currently the Editor-in-Chief of The Tattler, is not currently a member of the Editorial Board of The Tattler, is not currently a member of the staff of The Tattler, is not currently involved in the production of The Tattler, has not submitted any articles to The Tattler since July 1, 2005, and does not receive any form of compensation from The Tattler

#158

• Plaintiff Ellerbrock is not currently a student at IHS, is not currently a student at any ICSD school, is not currently the Distribution Manager of The Tattler, is not currently a member of the Editorial Board of The Tattler, is not currently a member of the staff of The Tattler, is not currently involved in the production of The Tattler, has not submitted any articles to The Tattler since July 1, 2005, and does not receive any form of compensation from The Tattler

#159

• Plaintiff Alexander is not currently a student at IHS, is not currently a student at any ICSD school, is not currently the News Editor of The Tattler, is not currently a member of the Editorial Board of The Tattler, is not currently a member of the staff of The Tattler, is not currently involved in the production of The Tattler, has not submitted any articles to The Tattler since July 1, 2005, and does not receive any form of compensation from The Tattler

no--i submitted my alumni advice that was published in june 2006

#160

• Plaintiff Sorrells is not currently a student at IHS, is not currently a student at any ICSD school, is not currently the Copy Editor of The Tattler, is not currently a member of the Editorial Board of The Tattler, is not currently a member of the staff of The Tattler, is not currently involved in the production of The Tattler, has not submitted any articles to The Tattler since July 1, 2005, and does not receive any form of compensation from The Tattler

#161

• Plaintiff Stinson is not currently a student at IHS, is not currently a student at any ICSD school, is not currently the Sports Editor of The Tattler, is not currently a member of the Editorial Board of The Tattler, is not currently a member of the staff of The Tattler, is not currently involved in the production of The Tattler, has not submitted any articles to The Tattler since July 1, 2005, and does not receive any form of compensation from The Tattler

#162

• Plaintiff Pokharel is not currently a student at IHS, is not currently a student at any ICSD school, is not currently the Layout Editor of The Tattler, is not currently a member of the Editorial Board of The Tattler, is not currently a member of the staff of The Tattler, is not currently involved in the production of The Tattler, has not submitted any articles to The Tattler since July 1, 2005, and does not receive any form of compensation from The Tattler

#162 (2)

• Plaintiff Halpert is not currently a student at IHS, is not currently a student at any ICSD school, is not currently the Arts and Entertainment Editor of The Tattler, is not currently a member of the Editorial Board of The Tattler, is not currently a member of the staff of The Tattler, is not currently involved in the production of The Tattler, has not submitted any articles to The Tattler since July 1, 2005, and does not receive any form of compensation from The Tattler

- ...but certainly he deserves a number of his own!

#163

• Plaintiff Fattaruso is not currently a student at IHS, is not currently a student at any ICSD school, is not currently the Photography Editor of The Tattler, is not currently a member of the Editorial Board of The Tattler, is not currently a member of the staff of The Tattler, is not currently involved in the production of The Tattler, has not submitted any articles to The Tattler since July 1, 2005, and does not receive any form of compensation from The Tattler

See Also

• ICSD Motion for Summary Judgment