Investigation Against Mr. Reddicks

To this date the board has provided no official response to their investigation. They claimed unofficially during a PTSO meeting 10 Jan 2012 (of which they refused to allow a recording), that Mr. Reddicks was suspended during holiday break, but that their investigation is not complete, and he is still on site as the highest position over hundreds of children every day. They refused to offer details of their investigation. They refused to offer documents leading to their conclusions. They stated that because there was inadequate information to file criminal charges, their position was to take no action beyond his being suspended a portion of the holiday break. This implies that the pedophilic behavioral standards for hiring are no higher than the standards for avoiding incarceration and contradicts the recommendations of both CPS, the Sexual Deviance investigation and the therapist appointed by the court to interview Mr. Reddicks. Many parents find that conclusion unacceptable.

Some parents are satisfied with their "Trust us" ambiguity of their lack of response. Others would like to know that due process was followed and that their children are not in danger. Those parents would like to know that exactly what is being requested is well-thought, communicated and documented. And that their attempt to follow due process to escalate their complaint to the appropriate governing bodies is open and fair.

It is of great concern that the board’s investigation appears to be centered on finding the source of the documents rather than the welfare of the students their positions exist to educate and protect. Their email and statements at meetings have centered around how the files were obtained, who may or may not have sent them, what kind of website the emails came from instead of what the allegations mean to the families involved. The fact that information was not sufficient for criminal prosecution does not affect its validity. And standards for criminal prosecution, we would hope are much lower than standards for working with children.

To a select number of individuals a document from CPS addressing the "unfounded" (meaning inadequate evidence to prove a criminal charge) declaration of ANOTHER set of accusations against him made in 2003. However, to this date, no known documents disproving the accusations made against him in 2000  by his own children have surfaced.