1994's Expensive Lawsuit Involving the Berkeley School District

414.

Published news story by Lurene Kathleen Helzer, August 1, 1994, East Bay Journal, “Berkeley: Harassment suit may cost school district”. This story I wrote a little more than four months after my first story about the juvenile sex abuse case involving an accused Berkeley teacher and a student there.

This follow-up story involves the legal costs associated with case on the Berkeley school district and how the insurance company for the district, General Star Indemnity Co. of Connecticut, refused to cover those litigation expenses. I was unable to get an estimate of those legal costs for the story.

In July of 2009, it shines some light on how some of California’s budget problems started years ago, why they kept on and remain today. That is, it shows some of the expenses that have -- over and over again –- crunched happily on California’s municipal, county and state budgets. I cannot in 2009 easily find information about how this incredible 1994 case was resolved, or if it was.

In this 1994 case, it was a matter of General Star Indemnity bringing a lawsuit on Berkeley’s district. Here was part of what the insurer argued in 1994:

• The policy between General Star and the BUSD does not cover alleged Title IX civil rights violations against the two girls.

• The company should get reimbursement for monies already paid for the defense of the school district in court.

• The company will not pay for bodily injury to minors out of “actual or threatened abuse or molestation” while in the “care, custody or control” of the school district.

The insurance policy, attached to court documents, clearly stated the company will not pay for suits involving molestation, threatened abuse or the negligent retention of any employee who engages in abuse.

The case began when the teacher, Charles Hamilton, was accused of creating a hostile environment for two female students because of his alleged molestation of them.

Former district business manager Anton Jungher was also named in the lawsuit for harassing the girls’ mother, who worked for the district.

415. December 20, 1993: How Fire Victims Got Back To Normal Life in Oakland, CA

Photo of boy in Oakland's Diamond Park in April of 1989 by Lurene is not related to this story, but shows something about how children view life, relate their stories.

415.

Published news story by Lurene Kathleen Helzer, December 20, 1993, East Bay Journal, “Home for the holidays”. Story about how families in the East Bay hills were settling into rebuilt homes. Their former homes were destroyed in the 1991 conflagration.

Revisiting the story in 2009, I am reminded of two things. First, I think there was an editing mistake which we were able to acknowledge and correct. We depict/identify Joanna Piper, 11, as before Hanukah candles in photo, but in the story, the young girl is quoted discussing Christmas. I vaguely remember the family calling editor Robert Bruce about the issue. They were not angry, though. They thought it was an innocent mistake at the cutting/editing table and considered it a cool tale for neighborhood friends, all of whom were recovering from the devastating fire. Mr. Bruce ran a correction in the following issue.

The second thing I think of is how children must be delicately interviewed. The journalist must (try to) use the usual rules of strict accuracy, but simultaneously remember the subject of the interview is just an excited kid.

In this case, I had before me pre-teens who were one minute discussing their lost cats and goldfish, and in the next describing in astonishing detail the loss of the entire home to a devastating fire. These kids mentioned the stays with relatives, the weird, meandering trips to Europe. They were essentially homeless, if only for two years.

Kids are interesting to interview after natural disasters, or in/about unresolved wars. I think the journalist has to listen carefully, let the child talk freely about what he/she remembers.

I don’t think you should suggest quotes to a child. It twists the story. Either use the kid’s words or do not. “If in doubt, leave it out,” as the old newsroom saying advises. This really applies to work with children.

Sometimes that will be the lost rabbit, sometimes the odd experience of homelessness. The thing is, the youngsters are still putting it together in their minds:

As the fire approached on Oct. 20, 1991, Abigail and Hannah’s father, Robert, handed each of them a box and told them to gather all they felt they could not do without in 15 minutes. They had to evacuate.

Abigail said she did not think he was serious, but packed anyway. She saved her toe-shoes from years of ballet. As they walked away, their father told her to take one last look at the house. “I thought he was being melodramatic,” she admitted.

After the fire destroyed their home, they moved several times — first to Lafayette with relatives, then to a rental house in the Adam’s Point neighborhood of Oakland.

Next, the family spent a year living in a 500 square foot apartment in London while Robert was on sabbatical from UC Berkeley.

“I couldn’t just forget about it,” Abigail said, later realizing that being in England distanced the family from the disaster.

While Abigail is a social butterfly, dancer and has a new driver’s permit, Hannah is studious in her behavior, quiet and prone to reading and spending time alone.

“The part of Christmas I’ve always loved is when it rains. I used to sit under the tree and watch it rain … I’ve missed that for the last two years,” said Hannah.

Check out my other blogs:

bayarealurene.blogspot
fecklesspreapproved.blogspot
unbelievableanimalstories.blogspot
baghdadiproposal.blogspot
risksinreporting.blogspot
nightclubman.blogspot
genesisoutline.blogspot
blackholeeconomics.blogspot