Update, 6 p.m. Friday, statement by Moraga School Superintendent Bruce Burns.
It is "beyond devastating" that the Moraga School District, in a legal brief, shifts some blame for childhood sexual abuse by an intermediate school teacher to the victim, said that victim, Kristen Cunnane.
Cunnane was responding to a legal answer to her complaint against the district and some of its former administrators states: "These answering Defendants allege that Plaintiff (Cunnane) was herself responsible for the acts and damages of which she claims herein, and by reason thereof is estopped from obtaining any damages as result thereof." The answer was filed Oct. 24, on behalf of the district, by attorney Louis A. Leone of Walnut Creek.
In a statement released by a media relations firm representing her, Cunnane said, “It is beyond devastating that the District would blame me for the years of horrific sexual abuse I was subjected to when I was just a child. There is a critical need for a culture shift in Moraga and elsewhere when it comes to tolerance of child abuse in schools, and this just underscores that we have further to go than I even thought. I can only hope that this lawsuit will move us one step closer to zero tolerance, while also going some way to compensate me for the years of abuse I suffered.”
The district's answer states "that Plaintiff was herself careless and negligent in and about the matters alleged in the complaint, and that said carelessness and negligence on said Plaintiff's part proximately contributed to the happenings of the incident and to the injuries, loss and damages complained of, if any there were, and said negligence on the part of the Plaintiff shall diminish her recovery herein in direct proportion to the extent of such negligence under the doctrine of comparative negligence."
Superintendent's statement
Moraga School Superintendent Bruce Burns issued a public statement Friday afternoon:
"While the school district cannot publicly discuss details of litigation, it would like to offer this public statement in response to recent stories that have appeared in the news media regarding a lawsuit brought against the Moraga School District by Kristen Cunnane.
'We certainly empathize with Ms. Cunnane and did not intend to cause her further distress in filing our formal Answer to her Complaint. However, this is a significant case that could have serious consequences for our school district. She is demanding several million dollars in damages. As a result, at this point in the proceedings we have an obligation not to waive any potential legal lines of defense. The district raised nine possible arguments that might be used in court. Attorneys routinely insert these into Answers filed to Complaints. Ms. Cunnane and the media have seized on only one of the nine potential areas and over-exaggerated its importance. As this case moves forward and more facts become known, the district will decide if any of these areas might not be applicable. That can certainly happen in this case.'"
ABC7 News has posted a video interview with Cunnane.
Cunnane, now a Walnut Creek resident and the assistant head coach of Cal Berkeley's women's swim team, sued the Moraga School District in September. Between 1994 and 2000, Cunnane was molested by Joaquin Moraga Intermediate School science teacher Dan Witters and then raped, stalked and abused by her physical education teacher Julie Correa. Witters killed himself in 1996. Correa was arrested in 2010 and is serving an eight-year prison term.
Last month, the district received notices of claims against it by two unnamed former students claiming abuse by Witters.
The Moraga School District has established a Student Safety Committee to advise on current practices on reporting child abuse and prevention resources. The Student Safety Committee has on its timeline Nov. 30 to present a report to the Governing Board reviewing "the implementation of Board-approved recommendations."
Up until a few years ago, the "CYA" motivator was the professional curtesy of helping your colleague avoid premature harsh action. I suspect now the pendulum has swung to the point that observers of suspect conduct "CYA" by reporting EVERYTHING and ANYTHING ASAP so as to avoid harsh action directed at YOU for failing to report. I know the battle is not over and more can always be done, but I also feel that we are wrongly ignoring the very real progress that has ALREADY been made in terms of reporting, awareness, etc. now versus ~15 years ago. That said, if Walters' conduct is as bad as suggested and Cunnane can connect the dots (causation) and overcome defenses, I would like to see Walters *personally* suffer economically. Perhaps a diminished pension and/or required community service. Something. I like the precedent/incentives of that more than bankrupting the District to "teach it a lesson," when the real harm will be borne by innocent children....
Whatever. Congratulations to Mr. Leone, for being the latest in a LONG LIST of people who have let these poor victims down. Disgusting.
"That said, if Walters' conduct is as bad as suggested and Cunnane can connect the dots (causation) and overcome defenses, I would like to see Walters *personally* suffer economically. Perhaps a diminished pension and/or required community service. Something. I like the precedent/incentives of that more than bankrupting the District to "teach it a lesson," when the real harm will be borne by innocent children...." Firstly, I don't think a person's retirement assets can be subject to tort (e.g. OJ's stash was shielded from the Goldmans) Secondly, community service? Are you kidding? How is any kind of community service that Walters can perform even start to compensate Ms Cunnane for the horrific treatment she suffered directly as enabled by him under the umbrella of MSD? It seems pretty clear to me that the only thing bureaucrats and little dictators understand/fear/worship is power and money. Accordingly jail time and ginormous fines/awards are indicated. And if the school district is strapped beyond the limits of their insurance coverage, well, you're right about some harm being incurred by innocent children/students but it is harm inflicted by Cunnane's abusers and enablers. Not her. ANd I submit that her harm is more egregious. Let the district go bankrupt (unlikely, IMHO). Clean house and start over.
I think the district has every right to fight that! Of course what transpired there was disgusting, but why are we cheering on a woman who seeks to cripple the school district for personal revenge?
So basically because it was long term abuse and not that run of the mill rape-and-dash that she somehow should of come to her senses by age 18 to stop this abuse? You don't find that offensive, Chris? Are you implying that she should of "matured" and stopped the abuse? Oh wait, she did. She told Correa that the abuse was ending and if she ever tried to contact her again she would call the police and tell everyone. She did that at age 17. She stopped her abuser at age 17, 4 years after the abuse started. At age 28 she put her abuser behind bars. At age 30 she put her name out there and retired Jane Doe. Seems to me that because she named herself you and your buddies seem more content to cast her in a money grubbing negative light than the Jane Does who just filed? Funny how that works and another reason why Jane Does like to remain that way. Their names and job titles and life choices cant be publicly attacked by the likes of you.
If insurance is covering this and the District lawyers are handing everything then why is Burns still talking about the case? The plaintiff is asking for an "undisclosed" settlement, why would Burns act as the spokesman for the district and say erroneously and possibly illegally that she is asking for "Millions of Dollars?" Why would he support the implausible language that these victims bore any responsibility for their abuse? That is not a plausible defense for teacher on student abuse! And should it not alarm parents of current students that their sitting board and Superintendent support that language? So if I understand it: Insurance is picking up the tab for all the legal fees and possible awards. The district will still be able to buy supplies and pay teachers because insurance is picking up the tab and no harm will come to the students financially? Why then would the Superintendent continue to issue public statements about the case especially ones that cast his district and himself in such a negative light? He answers to 100's of 12 and 13 year olds in his schools but is basically saying that if they are out there and have been abused don't even try to come forward. You might be to blame. Come ask him why on the 13th at the School Board meeting.
My views here have zero to do with her being named versus anonymous. My views are also not impacted by her subsequent life/career choices. Not sure what made you think otherwise. Actually, can I revise and clarify? When I said "not offensive" I should have said "not, on balance, objectionable." I find it offensive when plaintiffs seek millions from deep pockets two or three steps removed from malefactors, but, on balance, I do not find it objectionable because they have a legitimate right to seek compensation from all parties legally responsible for their horrific harm (but, IMHO, the proportion of liability should diminish, not increase, with "steps removed" from primary bad actors). Likewise, I find it offensive that the District says things that may cause incremental pain, but, on balance, do not find it objectionable because they have a legitimate right/duty to not unnecessarily pay out scarce (nonexistent?) cash that otherwise would benefit innocent children.
Sounding a tad like Max Headroom of late, CN. Better reboot that surgical, Vulcanesque, amoral computer you employ to explain everything in life. Life is more nuanced than you report it and the stolid gears of the American legal system do not grind forward with relentless disregard for the people involved as it seems you believe. What irks me is how the individuals, posing as professional (sic) school administrators and Board members have slunk off into comfortable retirements unscathed. If they committed crimes by covering up through inaction these crimes against children, then they should pay. Revisit their end of employment status, now "fired" not "retired" and let the chips fall where they may relative to their annuities. Do fired for cause (committing crimes against innocents in their care) individuals qualify for pensions? Maybe not.
If those in charge knowingly violate that trust, they should be removed and prosecuted immediately. How else will MSD maintain credibility? And worse, it represents tacit permission to continue or it may encourage others of that ilk to act out their perverse fantasies on our young. These incidents require a cleansing of those responsible, both to afford them the punishment they deserve and to sound a clear warning to those tempted by these dark forces that lurk in the future. And the healing can begin immediately, not years later when the courage arrives to step forward. Those who were in charge in those years are immensely repugnant to me and that they have gone unpunished is a crime in and of itself.
Can you please point out where in the suit it says that she is seeking a ridiculous amount of money? "undisclosed" is the only thing I see listed. I don't think people are cheering her on to make money, they are cheering her on for taking on the school district and the wonderful citizens like you who seem to be OK the district actions to this point. A blank check by the children of the district is not going to be written, its going to come from insurance if it ever gets to that point. The reason the same lawyer is representing the Lafayette and Moraga Districts is because the INSURANCE company hires then and picks up the bill for the fees and any damages. 100's of schools in the state share the same insurance company and won't lose any money if any is paid out to the 3 (and probably counting) plaintiffs. Understand the difference yet?
The School District has insurance for this kind of thing. So if it gets sued it just passes the whole affair over the insurance company, washes its hands of this untidy mess, and continues on its merry way. How the insurance company treats the former, abused (there seems to be no doubt that abuse took place), student is no concern of the District or even if it is a concern, the District has no ability or right to decide how its former student is treated in or out of court. When the former student took on the District she was taking on the District's insurance company so any actions resulting are a consequence of her actions and the District bears no obligations to its former student. Do I have that right?
As the Lamorinda school district's primary focus is protecting their assets and not the children, I hope these women get every dime they're asking for.
This is exactly what Correa's lawyers attempted to do, blame the victim. It didn't work. Burns claims that all those involved have moved on and no longer involved yet his comments go back to exactly the reason we are here. Blame the victim, circle the wagons, nothing to see here. His comments say as much. Saying its a standard legal defense is ridiculous, they still said it publicly. Is his message meant to shame the victim further as well as to warn those out there that if abused tomorrow, don't come forward, you are possibly at fault for your own abuse? seems that way to me.
Our educational model goes back to classical Greece where the word "pedagogue" originally meant the family slave who "led the child" to school and remained there throughout the school day as a bodyguard to protect the child from being molested by the teacher. Sources survive attesting to laws forbidding teachers from ever being alone with a student. Not only was it assumed that anyone who presented as a teacher of children was a pedophile, it was also accepted that a pedophile would be the most passionate teacher and therefore the best, as long as a platonic relationship was enforced. Enforcement was the responsibility of the parent. The relationship both at and away from school that has been described between Julie Correa and Kristen Cunnane is typical of the sort of mentoring relationships which occur in highly competitive societies and which the classical Greeks praised as producing the most excellent athletes. Surely our Lamorinda obsession with competitive swimming and the community imperative to strive for excellence had much to do with fostering the relationship between these two women, and to a certain extent Julie Correa was also a victim. Sappho, at least, would have forgiven her. But were Kristen's parents so blinded by their own passion for excellence that they never suspected what was happening? Maybe these Jane Does should also be naming their parents as defendants in their law suits.
"Moraga schools are covered by liability insurance, which is paying for their attorneys and would cover potential monetary awards, Burns said." The legal fees to pay for the bumbling lawyers will come from insurance as well as any payouts in the Lafayette or Moraga cases. Not 1 dollar will come from the students or parents.
Unfortunately, it sometimes takes a big hit in the pocketbook to get people to take notice. Children need to be protected from deviants. This will be a very painful wakeup call for the Lamorinda School District, as it should be. Most people still care about children, even those that are now their own. Ask Penn State how they would have handled things differently if they had the opportunity to go back and deal with Sandusky.
Pedophilia is abuse of innocents by adults and destructive to them in untold ways. Attempting to soften the blow with some arcane, interpretive "history" smacks of rationalization and excuse-making. I find these remarks naive and backward. As for Louie, this community is in no mood for soft-pedaling, evasive behavior relative to the safety of children. Louis ought to be clearing the air on this issue (if there is one) pronto. We are in no mood for more 'secrets'.