Sounds like a setup.

Posted by senatorblbo (anonymous) on August 21, 2008 at 8:50 a.m. (Suggest removal)

IF you have ever met this guy, you'd have no reason at all to believe he is capable of such a thing.

In fact, he is strictly a "by the books" kind of guy, and I look forward to his vidication in order to restore his honor and good name.

Posted by ssteen (anonymous) on August 21, 2008 at 10 a.m. (Suggest removal)

don't know if he is guilty or not (i hope not). don't know all of the facts. but this is why i believe things like fingerprinting parents before allowing them on a school fieldtrip is a complete waste of time. you never know WHO would be capable of such a thing until they are caught. and they will only have fingerprints on file ONCE they are caught.

Posted by my2cents8 (anonymous) on August 21, 2008 at 10:17 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Something just doesn't make sense here. It sounds to me as if the "pornographic" picture was of a teenager, perhaps a girl, taken by another teenager, perhaps a boy. If I am correct, then where is the child pornography? Why should Child "Protective" Services be called? Why would the police be called? How on earth can it be construed that the teen's parents abused or neglected her because another teen took her picture?

It looks to me as if Oei confiscated the cell phone because it was being used inappropriately, e.g., during school hours, against the rules. Why he kept it instead of returning it to its owner after school I cannot speculate. But at this point I am not convinced that he is guilty of the charges against him. In fact, he sounds innocent to me.

Posted by motherof3 (anonymous) on August 21, 2008 at 10:29 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Wait a minute. From the May 5 article about the picture:

"Sheriff's spokesman Kraig Troxell wouldn't identify the nature of the photo, saying only that it showed a juvenile female student and was "inappropriate."

"It does not rise to the level of a criminal case," he said of the photo's contents."

So what happened, did the photo change in 4 months? I think this guy is being railroaded.

Posted by nilpo (anonymous) on August 21, 2008 at 11:11 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Innocent until proven guilty.

Posted by reggie (anonymous) on August 21, 2008 at 11:27 a.m. (Suggest removal)

This is outrageous. When are we going to take our country back from the police?

Posted by Cossackathon (anonymous) on August 21, 2008 at 12:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Sounds like a b.s. charge because something very similar happened to me in Fairfax. I reported the inappropriate behavior of a child and was later fired.

This case will end up getting buried. LCPS will likely offer the accused the opportunity to resign and retain his teaching credentials but no school system will hire him.

His career as an educator is over.

The assistant principal should fight the charges, and sue the school system for defamation.

Posted by jbartelloni (anonymous) on August 21, 2008 at 12:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Remember - Innocent until proven guilty. The system is so flawed that innocent people get railroaded in too many instances. Even one is too many.

Posted by jayachp (anonymous) on August 21, 2008 at 1:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Just a quick note to the reporter: Indictments are handed UP, verdicts are handed DOWN.

Posted by jrhconsulting (anonymous) on August 21, 2008 at 1:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I have no faith in our Commonwealth Attorney's office to be even reasonably competent

Posted by AFF3 (anonymous) on August 21, 2008 at 2:06 p.m. (Suggest removal)

It doesn't sound like he has done anything worng, and I hope that they clear his name, once a charge like this has been linked to someone it is hard to redeem yourself, because eveyone will always remember the story. I hope he just keeps his head up through out this horrible situation

Posted by Melissa.Scutchings (anonymous) on August 21, 2008 at 2:12 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I've met him- really kind guy- and I just am totally shocked. Not to be cynical or anything, but I really hope he's got a top notch lawyer. He doesn't deserve this.

Posted by myrnafir (anonymous) on August 21, 2008 at 6:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)

If all he had is one picture of one girl that doesn't deserve this type of treatment. Maybe he did the girl a favor and just destroyed it. The article makes him sound like he has a computer full of pictures.

Posted by MBROOKS3 (anonymous) on August 21, 2008 at 11:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I had Mr. Oei when he was a teacher at South Lakes. He was in charge of the debate team and taught one of the best classes I ever took. He was the most brilliant teacher and would never do anything like what he is accused of. The charges are ridiculous!

Posted by Alyssaalter6 (anonymous) on August 22, 2008 at 8:06 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Mr Oei is a great guy, a true leader in that school, and a person with the highest integrity for the educational system. This charge sounds to me like it is a personal vendetta by the prosecutor to remove him from his position. The fact that they wait until the first day of school to remove him in handcuffs and have the press there tells me that this is a set up. As the one commenter suggested...how was this photo deemed not criminal to now a felony? Mr. Oei, keep your head up and we support you.

Posted by autterlouise (anonymous) on August 22, 2008 at 9:41 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Wake up people, No one knows what goes on in a persons mind or heart. Sometimes its not what we want to hear. Let the facts speak. Only time will tell if its true or not. I bet someone somewhere will come out of the woodwork and tell the truth one way or another.

Posted by Funnyguyva (anonymous) on August 22, 2008 at 10:41 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Funnyguy, this comment is so different than your other one on the LoCo blog about this:

"Who cares if South Riding is upset? Who is South Riding anyway. Do they think thier little sleepy neighborhood is above this type of behavior. GET REAL your nobody special. I guess you think this could only happen in a gang strewed area like Sterling Park. This is just the begining of the ice burg. Get ready it will get worst.

Posted by Funnyguyva (anonymous) on August 22, 2008 at 10:46 a.m. (Suggest removal)"

You have some good points here on this news article--we do not have all the facts. Your valid point is somewhat negated by your attitude on the other thread.

Posted by BarbaraMunsey (anonymous) on August 22, 2008 at 12:12 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I have known Ting-Yi Oei for approximately 8 years. He is a man of impeccable integrity. Usually I am not in defense of people accused of wrongs but this time I am certain. This man is kind, caring, and a man of moral ethics. While I believe that our system must act on information received, I believe the truth will come out and this man will be cleared.

Posted by patsy149 (anonymous) on August 23, 2008 at 6:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I have known Ting Yi, his wife Diane, and their two children as close friends starting 41 years ago with him in college. The news report hit me like a kick in the... stomach. Stunned. All the good things said about him above are absolutely true - plus Quaker faith, work with Morris Dees on Klan issues at the Southern Poverty Law Clinic on sabbatical when he was a civics teacher years ago... He's a straight shooter. A far better man than I.
Why were these charges brought when the first ones were reduced? Could this have anything to do with the race discrimination suit he filed against Fairfax in 2006 - with the approval of the EOOC- he's Chinese/Dutch -for failure to be hired as a principal after many applications- a case dismissed the same month a NoVa Asian student opened fire at VaTech -when there were no principals of Asian descent in spite of growing Asian student school populations?
There was far too little information to justify this news story outside of the immediate community. Apparently, girls these days allow boys to take such pictures and they get passed around after an argument or breakup. If the indictment is sealed, we will all live in limbo about the basis for the charges until the trial. Remember, the grand jury only learns what the prosecutor wants it to learn.
Meanwhile, Ting Yi's mother is still alive in her 80's. He has several brothers and sisters, and many nieces and nephews. Many lives have been torn asunder - as with the baseless lacrosse team charges in Durham 2 years ago. And the school is deprived of a proven, able administrator without warning. Is the county prosecutor elected?

Thank goodness someone above noted "Innocent until ...". I will always doubt such stories I see in the paper hereafter. And I will send money for lawyers fees to my friend.

Posted by pcrumrine (anonymous) on August 24, 2008 at 6:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I have known Ting-Yi and his family for 18 years.

Ting Yi Oei is a fine man from a good family, a committed educational professional with nearly 30 years of on the job experience. He is honest as the day is long, an advocate for the oppressed and disadvantaged. He is one of the few people I know whose actions coincide with his ideals. He is the kind of person you would like your son or daughter to grow up to be. The notion that Ting Yi is a sexual predator and a criminal is utterly without merit.

Successful educators like Ting Yi should be honored, not prosecuted, for tackling the wide range of difficult disciplinary situations that arise daily in our schools. Heck, the problem he attempted to resolve would never have arisen in the days before cell phones. Why are kids who misuse technology given the privilege of a cell phone in the first place? Where were the parents?

In the end, Ting Yi's many friends and strong family will see to it that his good reputation emerges intact, and perhaps strengthened. As Dr. Martin Luther King used to preach, "Unearned suffering is redemptive."

Posted by pjmurphy (anonymous) on August 24, 2008 at 8:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Barbra my darling, Please, one article was about the person and the other was about the reaction of a community. You, my dear need to get yourself in check and stick to what you know which by what you write is nothing. I suggest and it’s only a suggestion, take it or leave it, you need to get a life.

Posted by Funnyguyva (anonymous) on August 25, 2008 at 10:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)

i'm sure the DA has enough evidence to go after this guy. The DA stated that,“There’s more to the story,”. “If this was a matter of a photo that he possessed and maintained solely for the purpose of executing his job as vice principal, we would not be interested in prosecuting him. That is not the case.” So parents you be the judge.

Posted by reneewill_1999 (anonymous) on August 25, 2008 at 4:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)

This is INSANE.
The person who started this whole scenario... she's in Juvinile Hall.

Mr. Oei is the best assistant principal i know. When i found out he was back. I was excited and now that he's gone again... Looks like a settup to me.

Just because South Riding is a quite neighborhood doesn't mean things don't happen. Like a body in a dumpster. Except, we aren't typically in that type of position every day of our lives. But this situation is just down right ridiculous.

i think the DA just wants herself in the paper and to start something.

Posted by awahlne (anonymous) on August 26, 2008 at 8:40 a.m. (Suggest removal)

In a courtroom, it's innocent until proven guilty. In the court of public opinion it's everyone's own discretion. Let me be clear, Mr. Oei gives detention to boys, and not girls, even if they are together in the offending act. He has been called on this, and indeed backs down when understanding the legal repercussions of not doing so. So as to whether or not he did it, who knows? As to his record, I know it's below par personally.

Posted by dannysinbox (anonymous) on August 28, 2008 at 7:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I am relieved to know Mr oei has left my school. He ridiculed me while i was in school. He looks for any excuse to pull me into his office. It was edvident that he got pleasure out of dispining children. Once he pulled me out of one of my ap classes to talk about how many people i had in my car when i actually had the legal limit of people im my car. Time that should have been spent in class was completely wasted. Which obviously shows me that my education is not one of his concerns. He always gives me extremely weird vibes and i have always been uncomfortably around him. He once called my parents and described my underwear in detail. My parents were conmpletely appalled and disgusted at his actions. I feel safer knowing he is not at my school.

Posted by jennyhose09 (anonymous) on August 28, 2008 at 8:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Disgusted Parent...

I am appalled with the humiliation he bestowed upon my daughter when he made comment atleast twice a week concerning her cleavage line. We endured this throughout the year, which at one point my husband and i considered taking further action. We always felt that something was not right. I am relieved that the true oei has surfaced. I have assured my daughter that principal forester will be able to pick up the pieces that oei has left freedom high school. I am fully confident that freedom high school will be a better place.

Posted by concernedparent (anonymous) on August 28, 2008 at 11:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)

This whole affair is shocking to me. I've known Ting-yi and his family for over thirty years and know what a committed and creative teacher he has been in the VA schools over that time. Nothing I've seen in the reporting of this story tells anything at all about what happened that does not sound exactly like a school administrator doing his job with students behaving inappropriately. What a loss to the school system to have Mr. Oei sitting on the sidelines during the school year awaiting very slow justice. Meanwhile, using up household savings to pay legal fees to challenge what appear to be the flimsiest of charges. I hope those who have posted favorably about Ting-yi Oei will find ways to support his family during this time, including help with the legal fees.

Posted by trish717 (anonymous) on September 21, 2008 at 7:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I bet it is a setup, along with all these "anonymous" comments.

Posted by metalchaos (anonymous) on October 4, 2008 at 3:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Just, curious, concernedparent. What is an administrator supposed to do when a student habitually shows cleavage? Why have you, as a parent, not responded by getting your child to dress more appropriately for school? I am stunned to learn that an administrator cannot enforce the dress code without being perceived as being a pervert. Perhaps if parents today bought appropriate clothing for their children to wear to school, they would not be offended by principal's remarks. That doesn't prove innocence or guilt in this case, but it indicates where your priorities with your child are.

Posted by pyleiton (anonymous) on October 16, 2008 at 1:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Mr Oei is a good man and gets along very well with a lot of students. He's not only a very polite person but also a very well respected person even among the students. To jennyhose09, I've attended school with you and I know for a fact that you're not exactly a model student. "Time that should have been spent in class was completely wasted" It's not like you don't waste enough by talking with people in class anyways. And it's not untrue that you do wear enough provocative clothing to turn a lot of guys heads around. As for the two students the female was the type that would allow such a picture to be taken and the male was stupid and arrogant enough to start showing it up around the locker rooms and other public areas. That being said Mr. Oei should have his slate wiped clean from the tarnish of students who don't exactly give a better impression of the school.

Posted by xxkrnguydailyxx (anonymous) on January 13, 2009 at 11:01 a.m. (Suggest removal)

The case is tragic and heart-breaking because these charges, whatever the motive behind them and regardless of the outcome of a trial, have already damaged the reputation of a man – an award-winning educator - who has devoted his life to education and to peace and justice activism. Mr. Oei’s choice to defend his innocence, his reputation, his life’s work and the integrity of the school system and Freedom High School comes with a high price tag – personal trauma and anguish for himself and his family and financial ruin due to the costs of criminal defense.

News reports tell us that the use of cell phones among teens to share nude, semi-nude or sexually explicit photos is common. See, for example, http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24970829. In light of the Oei case, teachers in Loudoun County and the rest of Virginia might consider how they can be protected from professional and financial ruin when they intervene to stop inappropriate behavior among their students. In the meanwhile, those who care about strong schools and competent teachers should make their voices heard in support of Mr. Oei.

Posted by trish717 (anonymous) on February 7, 2009 at 9:04 a.m. (Suggest removal)

What is more heartbreaking is that the Commonwealth is so eager to make a name for themselves by rushing to judgment in these cases.Even if that person is cleared, it ruins their life. They did the same thing to my son. They found nothing. His life is ruined even though the charges have been dropped. We requested to have his record expunged but I know that they will not agree to this. THey looked like fools when they spread it all over the news. THey would have to admit they screwed up.

Posted by tisch (anonymous) on February 19, 2009 at 1:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)

concernedparent is a NUT CASE!!!!
It's the JOB of a Principal (Or Assistant) to point out "inappropriate" attire.
I suggest if you DID YOUR JOB AS A PARENT and didn't let your daughter go to school looking like a $10/crack whore hooker, maybe then he would not have to tell her that what she is wearing is inappropriate!
I swear to God, I think there should be a LICESNE REQUIRED to BREED!!! IT'S MOUTH BREATHERS like you that give Good/Honest/Hard working parents a bad name!

Posted by interested812 (anonymous) on April 20, 2009 at 11:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)

The irony is delicious. Here is a "zero-tolerance" administrator bitterly complaining about the injustuice perpetrated against him due to excess and intolerance in the system. Yet this is exactly what he has undoubtedly done to dozens of children over the years as their cries of innocence have been imperiously dismissed by him and others like him who implement "zero-tolerance". It is hilarious to hear him demand that all the details and circumstances of the event must be put into proper context; precisely what "zero-toolerance" policies disallow. Where was he when the children of Loudoun County were being railroaded by the "zero-tolerance" bullies and zealots.

Posted by Coriolanus (anonymous) on April 21, 2009 at 1:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Ok. Enough already. The charges against this individual were dismissed last month.
Coriolanus: you really need to look at the original publication date of an article before you work yourself up. Look for the "Child Porn Charges Against Freedom Assistant Principal Dropped" story dated April 1 on this website to understand why this particular case was thrown out.

Posted by JSolGen47 (anonymous) on April 21, 2009 at 1:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Coriolanus: I have no clue how your comment relates to this case. However, Loudoun County better not start tolerating pornographic pictures in the schools, kids pulling other kid's pants down, and the like. In addition, you have no idea what Mr Oei's views of zero tolerance are, but it doesn't really matter. When you are an employee, you are required to enforce your employer's policies.

Posted by momof2 (anonymous) on April 21, 2009 at 2:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)

momof2:
I am utterly baffled as to why you want to feign ignorance and pretend that you are unable to clearly see the palpable hypocrisy in Mr. Oei's claims of injustice. It is, as I have said, the same type of injustice that he routinely inflicts on students and their families. Go ahead, google "zero-tolerance in Loudon County" and see the hateful cases that appear. And remember, you and your 2 precious kids are only a Luden's coughdrop away from the whole "zero-tolerance" system turning against you.

Posted by Coriolanus (anonymous) on April 21, 2009 at 8:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)

JSol:

You seem to have worked yourself into a lather without knowing anything about "zero-tolerance". Same deal; go google "zero-tolerance in Loudon County" and you will then perhaps begin to understand the depths of Mr. Oei's hypocrisy.

Posted by Coriolanus (anonymous) on April 21, 2009 at 8:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)

corio, dubbing yourself a Shakespearean play and insulting strangers with unbacked charges in turgid prose doesn't make you credible.

Do you have specifics against this individual?

Your google doesn't.

Why resurrect old news that, as has been pointed out to you, has been superceded by dropping of charges?

What axe do you have to grind?

Interesting that one of the first google hits shows a posting by an extremely vocal local anti-school activist.

I never understood why someone would protest community schools with a group named FOR them.

But that is one tangent that could be drawn from your diatribes that holds true: not everything in Loudoun makes sense!

Posted by BarbaraMunsey (anonymous) on April 21, 2009 at 9:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Barbara,

Your senseless hysterics don't impress me, and I do not have, in point of fact, "a google". Also, you seem to find insults in my words, but none in those who addressed me; you fool no one. You also complain of insulting strangers, then you proceed to insult strangers; laughable hypocrisy. All said and done, you added nothing but a few chuckles to the discussion.

Posted by Coriolanus (anonymous) on April 22, 2009 at 12:04 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Almost forgot. I am not "resurecting old news". If you missed it, Mr. Oei had a lengthy article featured on the front page of the Washinton Post Outlook section on Sunday. It was he, not I, who "resurected" the news. Strike three, you're out.

Posted by Coriolanus (anonymous) on April 22, 2009 at 12:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Nice projection on the "senseless hysterics", corio.

You suggested a google:

"JSol:

You seem to have worked yourself into a lather without knowing anything about "zero-tolerance". Same deal; go google "zero-tolerance in Loudon County" and you will then perhaps begin to understand the depths of Mr. Oei's hypocrisy.

Posted by Coriolanus (anonymous) on April 21, 2009 at 8:47 p.m. (Suggest removal)"

It was the second time you recommended it, so obviously a search of that phrase has some significance to you.

It brings up nothing about Mr. Oei.

It does bring up a story posted by someone who has spent a lot of time protesting schools in the past year or so.

Your words read not only as insulting toward Momof2, but somewhat threatening as well:

"And remember, you and your 2 precious kids are only a Luden's coughdrop away from the whole "zero-tolerance" system turning against you.

Posted by Coriolanus (anonymous) on April 21, 2009 at 8:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)"

Ugly, and a bit creepy.

Also strange to start ranting about this particular story so very long after the fact.

I find it laughable that you consider your remarks to be "discussion".

Have a nice day.

Posted by BarbaraMunsey (anonymous) on April 22, 2009 at 12:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)

We cross posted, coriollanca.

No, the judge closed the subject by dismissing the charges.

Find the ballpark before you appoint yourself ump.

Posted by BarbaraMunsey (anonymous) on April 22, 2009 at 12:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Charges can be reissused, and a new trial can be ordered. Closed does not mean OVER.

Posted by Funnyguyva (anonymous) on April 22, 2009 at 9:05 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Barbara;
Your seneseless hysterics are becoming more insulting, more menacing, more vulgar, and less relevant with each post; take your meds, it might calm you down. And since you seem to be comically unaware of it, The Loudoun School district has so grotesquely abused its students through the administration of "zero-tolerance", that Loudoun parents, driven to desperation, have enlisted the aid of The Rutherford Institute. It was to these cases I referred, and your inability to discern this simple and obvious fact is your problem, not mine. Indeed, that you see anything but a healthy well-intentioned cautionary tale makes you seem that much more menacing and frightening.

Lastly, it's really too bad Mt Oei himself didn't cooperate with the judge and keep the matter "closed". He decided to "resurect" the "closed" issue quite voluntarily and quite publicly by writing a lenghty feature article in Sunday's Washington Post.

Game. Set. Match.

Posted by Coriolanus (anonymous) on April 22, 2009 at 9:06 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Oh yeah, if the judge "closed the subject", why are you here still discussing it? Your hypocrisy is really quite entertaining. I repeat: Game, Set, Match.

Posted by Coriolanus (anonymous) on April 22, 2009 at 9:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Tennis now? Okay, corio, whatever you need to make yourself feel better.

Your links have nothing to do with Mr. Oei.

As I said, you seem to have an axe to grind, Having to do with the unrelated issue that some parents have sough help from Rutherford on? In 2003, in case you didn't notice. That's pretty durn current!

Are you suggesting that Rutherford will be representing the helicopter parent who apparently set out on a vendetta against an administrator for suspending a child who not only had sexting on one of their gadgets, but pulled another student's pants off in school?

That's what this story has smelled like from the beginning: not what the admin did, but who the kid was, and what their parent decided to do to make their kid's behavior go away.

Pretty common these days, sadly enough.

Maybe it isn't me who needs meds (glad to see you're a doctor too--if you are a psychiatrist, maybe you can pull a book off your shelf and look up "projection". If you aren't busy refereeing virtual tennis on the internet).

Angry, angry anonymous person, aren't you?

What happened to you, or your kid that set off your strange vendetta here?

I'll wait with interest to see the civil suit against Mr. Oei, for so foolishly suspending a kid (in spite of the parent's alleged threats of legal action) who apparently made the very bad decision to think it's okay to pull down pants of opposite sex classmates in school.

Keep grinding your axe.

Since it would be a trial based partially on technology, maybe you'll have the pleasure of seeing your anonymous IDs show up in court.

That really might be entertaining!

Have a nice day, Dr. Umpire Referee Shakespearean Roman General! (no issues in your little world, are there? Yikes! lol)

Posted by BarbaraMunsey (anonymous) on April 22, 2009 at 10:51 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Barbara,
Your posts, unfortunately, have degenerated from hysterical senseless blathering to the wild-eyed, half-crazed, foaminig-at-the-mouth rants of a lunatic. To be perfectly candid, your posts are no longer even slightly entertaining; they are freakish and disturbing. And despite all of this, and despite the fact that you are, of course, wrong in every particular, I continue to be intrigued by your tireless dedication to a subject that you very loudly proclaimed to be "closed". Pretty durn hypocritical of you.

You and your plethora of issues be sure to have a nice day toether, and keep on fighting the good fight. LOL.

Posted by Coriolanus (anonymous) on April 22, 2009 at 1:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Wow, corio, that sure is a plethora of projection!

So, still no answers to your own "issues" raised?

I guess there are no answers, are there?

Just an axe to grind, with some diversion thrown in on a six-year old Rutherford posting, and absolutely nothing relevant to Mr. Oei.

Keep em coming, corio.

Eight "last word" posts from you, and still no point made.

Do you have one?

Other than whatever your personal issue is?

Posted by BarbaraMunsey (anonymous) on April 22, 2009 at 2:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Barbara,
Coriolanus is an internet troll. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Tr...

If you stop responding to the idiot he will just go away.

Posted by llm (anonymous) on April 22, 2009 at 4:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Barbara:

This last post of yours, despite its litany of fatuous redundancies, was pretty funny. And I might add, not nearly as ghoulish as your others. Nevertheless, whatever ails you, is certainly no small thing.

PS-Beware of internet idiot trolls like llm. And if you just ignore he/she/it, he/she/it will likely leave you alone.

Posted by Coriolanus (anonymous) on April 22, 2009 at 5:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)

llm, I know corio is engaging in all the useless behavior of a standard troll, but there is enough pointing in a particular direction that I do think they are a specifically Loudoun School system-focused troll, with a personal axe to grind.

I have a child in Freedom cluster, where this happened.

What happened to Mr. Oei appears to have resulted from a parent working the system to extract revenge for a disciplinary action.

Everything corio is harping on, although out of date in the specifics, are policies that some use as attack basis for other issues.

There are several in Loudoun schools (as there are in any system) with their own cadres of protesters, some of whom end up in court about it periodically.

Yes, corio is an anonymous ass acting like a plain troll, but may also be someone perfectly willing to use Mr. Oei for their own actual issues in Loudoun rather than simply as entertainment in virtual world.

The man has already had his life ruined, but the real life trolls don't care. How do you think this ended up in court, after all?

I understand "not feeding the trolls", but sometimes they do need to be confronted--both in the real world, and the virtual.

I'm not worried about him leaving me alone.

Posted by BarbaraMunsey (anonymous) on April 23, 2009 at 9:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Barbara, I think you are right about this.

Posted by momof2 (anonymous) on April 23, 2009 at 10:03 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Yes, yes, I know Barabara is generally a worthless troll exhibiting all the odious and predicitable tactics associated with trolls. And I know that her stalker-like approach to virtual polemics may strike you as bizarre and even threatening, but really, I don't think she is dangerous. She seems to be just an uninformed, quasi-literate zealot dedicated to some sort of vengeful quixotic quest against students. I have no idea why she has such open and extreme animosity towards children. Maybe she'll tell you, but who knows?

Posted by Coriolanus (anonymous) on April 23, 2009 at 10:04 a.m. (Suggest removal)

And thanks for the compliment DQ; I think she will ultimately concede her errors

Posted by Coriolanus (anonymous) on April 23, 2009 at 10:06 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Don't hold your breath, coriol.

Golly, you CAN'T, can you?

Well, I'm sure you'll get it all worked out sooner or later.

Just keep looking in that mirror and saying "I'm big enough, I'm bad enough, and gosh darn it! People will fear me!"

lolol

Posted by BarbaraMunsey (anonymous) on April 23, 2009 at 3:12 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Stop beggin' Barb, it is making you look more foolish and stupid than you already do. Golly, that is actually pretty durn hard to do, come to think of it. Either way, you're humiliation is far from complete, I'm sure. But you keep keepin' on there Tiger, and maybe you can convince yourself that you're a real force to be reckoned with! Pfffft....

Posted by Coriolanus (anonymous) on April 23, 2009 at 7:36 p.m. (Suggest removal)

corio, let's delete the modifiers and see if you have anything real to say yet:

nope.

So, when will the civil suit be filed in re Mr. Oei and zero tolerance in Loudoun, to be handled by the Rutherford Institute?

.....chirp......chirp.

Back to your mirror, Stuart, and try try again.

Posted by BarbaraMunsey (anonymous) on April 23, 2009 at 10:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Bar, I repeat, stop the begging, it's just not funny anymore. What is funny however, is the remarkable fact that you haven't yet discerned that your clumsy rhetoric, antediluvian humor, and vacuous language only compound your defeat and increase your humiliation. More's the pity. As for that bumbling, incompetent, Mr. McGoo-like doofus of an assistant principal you have there, I am positively delighted that he received a taste of his own hateful medicine. Rough justice to be sure, but justice it is. Waa, waaa, waa..

You want some cheese to go with that whine?

lololol....

Posted by Coriolanus (anonymous) on April 23, 2009 at 11:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)

corio,
"Coriolanus" is such a tragic figure and you seem to be projecting the character's personality with comments you are making here. Do you think this will ultimately be effective in influencing others to take your viewpoint? In the end, I don't think Coriolanus was successful, was he?
Also, if you were referring to me as "DQ', please don't. Not LOL.

Posted by momof2 (anonymous) on April 24, 2009 at 11:30 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Bar,

Sadly, you spend a lot of time projecting, and it doesn't seem to advance your cause in the least. Nw then, relative to your insouciant and misguided interpretation of Coriolanus? As usual, all wrong.

Posted by Coriolanus (anonymous) on April 24, 2009 at 12:04 p.m. (Suggest removal)