Search The Tattler

Saturday, August 5, 2017

Alameda County District Attorney Brings Charges in Emery Sexual Assault Case

District Attorney's Charge Questions Emery Schools Superintendent's Aplomb

Rubio Twists in the Wind

News that the Alameda County District Attorney's office has brought charges against a 17 year old student for sexually assaulting a 15 year old at Emery Secondary School last May and not reported to police by the Superintendent brings fresh allegations in the ongoing story against the Superintendent who continues to claim he was correct to not call the police upon learning of the assault.  News of the charges brought by the County was reported by East Bay Times investigative reporter Matthias Gafni today who also alerted readers that Emeryville's Chief of Police has backtracked on initial reports that Mr Rubio had violated mandated reporter law by not calling the police after he learned about the alleged assault (along with another alleged assault the week before at Emery).
Mr Rubio's insistence he did nothing wrong by not calling the police is refuted by Bill Grimm, senior attorney for the National Center for Youth Law whom the East Bay Times story quotes, "School personnel mistakenly believe that they need to conduct some investigation of suspected abuse/neglect before they report [to police]...If in doubt, report!"

The mandated reporter law requires professionals who work with children, including teachers, school administrators, psychologists and others to notify police or child protective services when they receive a report of alleged abuse.  The law states that “No proof of abuse or neglect is needed, only ‘reasonable suspicion’ that child abuse or neglect may have occurred.” 
Emery Schools Superintendent
John Rubio

He says he knows the children lied
about the assaults.  The Alameda County
District Attorney believes the children.
The Superintendent has invoked a clause within the mandated reporter law that permits someone such as a school superintendent to not report if there is absolute certainty no crime happened.  For Mr Rubio, who was not witness to the alleged crimes, to not be guilty of the law's failure to report provisions, he would have to have no doubt whatsoever that the incidents did not take place and be in a position to provide reasonable evidence to support that claim.

However, Mr Rubio's claim is severely weakened by the fact that the guardians of the abused children thought the assaults had taken place and they themselves, without the District's help, filed police reports.  Further eroding Mr Rubio's claims of innocence is today's revelation from the East Bay Times that Alameda County puts enough stock in the belief that at least one assault took place that they directed prosecutors to bring charges in the case.

The East Bay Times story reveals another case of twisted logic needed to clear the Superintendent in our town.  In an interview with the Times and its 500,000+ circulation, Emeryville's Chief of Police, Jennifer Tejada appears to be protecting Superintendent Rubio.  Regarding what the newspaper calls a "backtrack" on Mr Rubio's culpability, Chief Tejada is now positing that Superintendent Rubio could not have known for certain that assaults did not take place and also simultaneously that it is acceptable that he did know that with certainty and that he is therefore innocent of violating the mandated reporter law.  For its part, the Alameda County District Attorney says there is not enough evidence against Mr Rubio to bring charges for violating the notoriously difficult to prosecute mandated reporter law.

Emeryville City Council members have expressed desire to further investigate the case involving Superintendent Rubio and the Emery Unified School District to whom they are contractually bound to with the city/schools campus at the Center of Community Life, the site of the alleged sexual assaults.

The Tattler broke the story HERE.

The East Bay Times story is HERE.

6 comments:

  1. Well, the brain trust behind the ECCL always wanted to be in the news. I guess now they've gotten their wish.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Perhaps Superintendent Rubio should testify under oath in this case of the 17 year old student that was charged by the District Attorney. After all since Mr Rubio knows beyond the slightest doubt this student is innocent, Alameda County has committed a gross miscarriage of justice he says. Is Mr Rubio going to let an innocent young man's life be destroyed by the state, forever branded with the sobriquet 'sexual predator'?

      Delete
  2. You make a claim but do not cite the actual charge? What charge did the DA actually charged the young man with?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The charge is assault. This crime is relatively common on school campuses although not always reported for a host of reasons, not the least is what is transpiring with this case; sometimes victims are not believed. Emery cannot control everything all the students do all the time on the campus obviously. But what they can control is making sure the mandated reporter law is followed and report any alleged crimes of abuse to the police, even if they feel child abuse happening on school campus might reflect badly on the school district.

      Delete
  3. Boy, Emery sure finds itself in the newspaper a lot.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's true. A functional school district stays out of the news...it just hums along, quietly doing its job educating children.

      Delete