Benton County Attorney's response to school's teacher scandal statement

I was working up in Cedar Rapids on Friday, so missed Benton County Attorney David C. Thompson's response to the Benton Community School District's statement regarding recent revelations that the district allowed a teacher to resign and keep his teaching license for years after an internal investigation revealed that teacher had been sending sexually themed e-mails to current and former students.

That district response caused a lot of confusion among online commenters on Friday, and I can only assume among readers generally. Thompson offers us a little much-needed order concerning the Benton case, with dates and names and bullet points.

Some highlights:

1. Documents obtained by the county attorney's office in August 2009 show that the district knew about a teacher's sexually inappropriate e-mails to several Benton Community students aged 11 to 14 as early as Nov. 21, 2005.

2. The district never reported the matter to the Benton County Sheriff's Department, Benton County Attorney's Office or the Department of Human services at any time in 2005, 2006, 2007 or 2008.

3. When a Benton County Detective attempted to interview Superintendent Gary Zittergruen on Jan. 9, 2006, concerning the matter, Zittergruen refused to answer many of his questions, telling the detective it was a "personnel matter". He told the detective it would take a court order if he wanted that information -- that delay hindered the criminal investigation.

4. That investigation was further delayed when the district when the district's attorney, Brian Gruen, told law enforcement they'd need to get a second court order for information in February 2006.

5. Even then, the district didn't provide law enforcement with all the relevant information. Thompson didn't know he hadn't received the entire school investigation file until he learned from the district's newly hired attorney, Douglas Oelschlaeger, that there were more documents.

6. The County Attorney finally received those documents -- containing new information from the investigation -- on Aug. 10, 2009 and May 13, 2009.

7. "As of this date, the State is still unsure as to whether or not it has received a complete copy of the District's investigation into this matter."

You can read the entire document here -- 

Benton County Attorney Statement

Thompson calls the district's response "disappointing" for a couple of reasons:

First, the District claims "inaccuracies" are contained in recent media articles. These articles not only appear to be factually correct, but an be verified by an examination of public record documents. Second, and more importantly, the recent District Response does not address the underlying problem here" they failed to report this very serious matter to Benton County Law enforcement officials.

He goes on to list eight reasons why law enforcement investigations are preferable to internal investigations when it comes to allegations of teacher sexual misconduct and abuse. They have specialized training, more tools and resources, they're impartial and they don't charge districts a dime for the work -- just to name a few.

Thompson's not the only one who thinks it's a no brainer to have law enforcement investigate allegations like those at Benton Community rather than conducting that investigation internally. I'll be writing more about that for Wednesday's column.