Posted on Leave a comment

Clarity helps

Mr. Lusby,

I am perplexed by your representation of the circumstances. I can speak affirmatively that you had awareness of a portion of the process and my particular position on standing on my constitutional rights to reserve my 4th amendment right to protect from retaliation (which is what had and continues to happen) as a condition (prior restraint) to stand on my first.

I understand that most citizens will unknowingly submit to the requests of authority, as they believe they have some command to obey authority, regardless if the authority is lawful or an evil doer. I also recognize that someone standing on their rights looks incredibly bizarre to a culture who lives in fear of the authority.

I also can say that you never reached out to me privately to discuss this matter and I have no basis to assume you have listened to my volume of podcasts (most notably the day after my release after the unlawful arrest).

I also believe that your perception indicates that you have not read through the volume of communication between me, defense counsel, nor reviewed evidence before the federal court. I conceded that would be an unreasonable expectation, and attempting to navigate those documents to discern what transpired is too burdensome and it would be easier to draft a narrative in the manner you did.

I am going to pull out statements in your public post and provide clarity from the Plaintiff’s perspective, and the position of the court.

One, I think the lawsuit is a complete waste of taxpayer of money. As someone who is running for school board, a volunteer position, I couldn’t imagine being asked to bear the cost on my own or to expect district employees to pay the cost. I’m definitely interested in how the court will rule.

The use of taxpayer money to fund a private legal matter is the root of the issue.

  • Do you agree with taxpayer money being used to fund private legal matters?
  • Did you ever investigate if using taxpayer money for private legal matters was lawful? Or did you just accept the presentation from the board?
  • Did you submit any questions, documents through RTKL to obtain an answer?
  • Did you ever research 42 USC 1983?
  • Did you ever research qualified immunity and what the judged stated regarding qualified immunity?
  • Will you continue to remain silent and not ask a question of the board like “The memorandum stated that defendants didn’t have qualified immunity, and have been denied qualified immunity. On what legal authority has the board stood to continue to approve taxpayer funds in a private legal matter?”

I understand that taking that position would not be politically popular but it certainly would be constitutionally appropriate if it exposes fraud within Octorara School District.

Two, the lawsuit is a complete waste of the district’s/boards time and energy. Time that should be spent on making Octorara a school of choice and furthering the education of our students. It is a cloud that hangs over many of the meetings I have attended.

You would have complete agreement with me on this perspective. In my Federal Complaint I demonstrated repeatedly beginning in October of 2021, to reasonably inform the Board the lawful limits of their authority. I prefer to not go over and over again how many times they were warned as that is all in the Federal Complaint.  When I presented the Letter of Intent to Sue, in March of 2022, resulting from the fraudulent trespass warning from Dr. Orner, the board mocked me.  Who in the community researched that document? Who understood that I expressed I did not want to resolve the issue in Federal Court?  Who chose to stand on their authority under “color of law” and refuse to seek civil rights counsel?

Did I want to take this to the Federal Court?  Absolutely NO! But, If I don’t stand on my rights, who will stand in Octorara?  Nobody. The issues are complex, the parents are afraid and public schools are chaotic. Show me a parent that knows that they have given over their child to the state, and surrendered their constitutional rights to a policy and I will show you a leprechaun riding on a unicorn.


Three…three minutes. This whole thing could have been avoided if the board allowed the plaintiff 3 minutes to speak. According to court documents, he was hired by parents to speak on their behalf. Policy 903 which the plaintiff is arguing against and the board was enforcing, actually allows for exceptions. (An exception, permission is not a lawful condition to express a constitutional right. While citizens may have consented through contract to school “policies” as Ben Pratt stated the Constitution is the superior to policy.  Me specifically, as an advocate did not sign a contract to policies, which obligate me to acknowledge unconstitutional exceptions, permissions or conditions)

 The Board President could have asked the remaining members if they would allow an exception for him to speak. Had they granted that, this would all have been avoided. This is frustrating especially considering how many parents, including myself, have spoken for three minutes just to have the board continue as if nothing was said. Was giving this person three minutes for them to ignore the end of the world and worth all the time, aggravation and money that has been spent? (Is it possible that my actions were in a movement to demonstrate to the citizens why the board is ignoring you?)

I imagine there are parts of my thoughts that the current board members will disagree with. I also imagine there are parts of my thoughts that some of the new individuals running will disagree with. I think that’s ok. It’s healthy to have disagreements. I don’t 100% agree with any of the current board members on everything nor do I agree 100% with others who are running against them. Since when did diversity of opinions become a bad thing? I think having differing viewpoints adds strength to our district and not weakness. (Disagreements are fine. Are you willing to stand up and say no, in defiance of the majority if you learn that the Octorara School Board is using taxpayer funds for a private legal matter?  Or, will you remain silent and sit back and allow a non-citizen fight for lawfulness within Octorara School District and have the judge determine right and wrong.  Please define the two paths for the public and for myself.  I will state my perspective openly.

If Plaintiff’s lawsuit is dismissed.

As the plaintiff I will research the basis the judge dismisses the case and come forward publicly and speak for 3 minutes offering a sincere apology.

If Plaintiff’s case is found in favor of Plaintiff.

The terms of settlement, as the single plaintiff, I could ask the judge to have the defendants repay the taxpayers, or the Judge may order that.  

What would you suggest happen in the event the defendants are found guilty of the charges in the original complaint, and the additional charges coming in the amended complaint which will detail the fraudulent use of taxpayer funds?

I think that the majority of folks have no interest in seeking truth on this issue, researching the details of the complaint, and look at evidence.  It is easier to attack the Lesser Magistrate in narrative than to ask questions.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *