Saturday, August 7, 2010

Part 2 - Correspondence evidence of Lies from Board of Trustees, Principal

18 February 2010
Dear Ms Raue I refer to our phone conversation on 9 February 2010, a message you left on our 0800 number on the same day, and your email of 10 February 2010 in which you provided a copy of your request for information to the South End School. Thank you for providing this information. Under principle 6 of the Privacy Act you are entitled to request, and have access to, personal information held by an agency. This right is not absolute and an agency can withhold information under sections 27-29 of the Privacy Act. I should also point out that 'personal information' under the Privacy Act is defined as information about an identifiable individual. So long as you are identified by the information, or it relates to you, then this is covered by the Act. You requested information about the garden at South End School. Unless this information identifies you in some way, it will not be your personal information so you will not be entitled to this information under the Privacy Act. I have contacted the School about your requests for information and have also asked it about information it appears to have received from the Police about you. I will be in further contact as soon as I receive the School's response.  Regards 
Diane Swan Privacy Commission

25 March 2010
Dear Ms Raue 
I refer to previous correspondence concerning your complaint that the South End School has not provided you with personal information as requested. I have now had a response from the School. It advises that the only personal information it holds about you comprises 

  1. emails you have sent; 
  2. a supporting letter the principal Rod O'Leary wrote on your behalf on 9 November 2006; 
  3. a letter from the Board of Trustees dated 25 March 2009 explaining its concern over an incident; and 
  4. a copy of an incident report sent to Carterton Police on 5 February 2010.

    As you sent the emails to the School you will have copies already. You also have a copy of the Board of Trustees letter as you have provided us with a copy. The School says that you also have a copy of the supporting letter and received a copy of its complaint (or incident report) to the Police during the court process. As such, it does not have to provide this information to you again.
     If you have not received this information please let me know. As I have told you previously, you are not entitled to information about the school garden under the 
    PrivacyAct as this is not 'personal information' for the purposes of the Act. The School has also told me that it did not collect any information about you from the Police.
    I understand you had a meeting with Mr O'Leary at which you told him about being charged by the Police, and which is also referred to in the Board of Trustees letter.
    As you disclosed this information to the School, and it did not collect any further information gathered from Police, there is no 
    privacy issue for us to investigate. 
You are welcome to provide your comments which I would appreciate receiving by 9 April 2010.  Regards Dawn Swan | Team Leader, Investigations (Wellington) | Office of the PrivacyCommissioner | PO Box 10094 | Wellington 6143 | 

I immediately responded:
The penultimate paragraph of your letter in particular, is an orchestrated litany of lies.  
I didn't disclose any information to Rod O'Leary.  
No such information existed. 
There was no such meeting. 
The first I knew of any allegations of me being charged by the police was when I was warned by a senior staff member that I would be receiving a letter from the Board, sacking me from my job because of an allegation that I had been charged by the police - which I had not been, which makes a mockery of your letter claiming I disclosed something that had not happened.
There is no evidence of any such meeting, and if there had been, O'Leary was obliged to make notes, because of the seriousness of the allegations, so where are they?
On what date was this meeting alleged to have taken place and where is any evidence of it?
Katherine Raue 
Firstly, I'd like a response to the email reproduced below, sent five days ago, urgently please.  Secondly, the school is deliberately withholding information.  There have been a number of complaints from parents regarding the manner in which I have been treated by the staff and BoT and the request for copies of them is well overdue.
Katherine Raue 

The Principal is deliberately lying.  
There was no meeting at which I disclosed to him that I had been charged with any such offence.  
I hadn't been charged with any such offence.
The Privacy Commissioner's Team Leader knows perfectly well that the letter from the BoT does not refer to any such meeting because it never happened, it is a figment of her imagination and nothing more!
Dallas Powell, the Deputy Principal, told me that the Board was planning to send me the letter, which was the first I heard about it, confirming that there was no meeting at which I told the principal.
Where is any evidence at all of the alleged meeting?
I've never been charged with any such thing so why would I say I had been so I could be sacked, this is outrageous dishonesty!
Rod O'Leary is a deliberate liar, which is why he has frequent heart attacks, because he causes violence in the community with his nasty lies, and he knows it.  
I am informed that XXXXXXXX has now taken a year off to recover from the stress of parents abusing her for her lies, bullying and lack of action too.
I requested all information under the OIA as well as the Privacy Act which is why I wrote to the Ombudsmen's Office.
He is a selfish, greedy, dishonest, politically aspiring, devious gossip, like his mate Gavin Kennedy.  They are also thieving crooks.--
Katherine Raue

31st March 2010 - 14:38
Dear Ms Raue 
I refer to your email below and one sent on 30 March. 
I will contact the school about the complaints or letters from parents you refer to. 
In terms of the meeting which you allege did not take place, I refer you to an email you sent to the school on 3 September 2009 in which you said: "I met with the principal Rod O'Leary, and told him that the allegation that I had been charged with any offence involving a child was untrue". 
Your comment that there was no such meeting is either incorrect or you have forgotten that meeting took place. 
It also appears that you did disclose information to Mr O'Leary during this meeting. If you require information urgently for a court hearing, you should be using the court discovery process. 
Under court rules each party to a proceeding is required to discover the existence of documents to every other party. 
This is done using a discovery order. 
If this information is required for a court hearing, you should ask your lawyer, or the court, about getting a discovery order. 
We cannot help you in this regard. I will be in further contact in due course.  
Regards Dawn Swan | Team Leader, Investigations (Wellington) | Office of the Privacy Commissioner

31st March 2010 - 12:13
The school is deliberately withholding information, and the principal is lying if he caused you to "understand" any such thing.There have been a number of written and verbal complaints from parents who support me regarding the actions of the staff and letter from the BoT regarding me, and the request for copies of these complaints is well overdue.Where are the dated notes of this alleged meeting at which the principal alleges I told him this rubbish?  This claim is an outright lie and O'Leary knows it, so does the deputy principal, who came to my home and told me that I would be getting the letter because of discussions at a Board meeting which were recorded in the staff representatives notes of the meeting, which is how the DP found out about it.I request those notes also, immediately, and sworn statements from the DP and the staff rep.The information is urgently required to prepare for Court hearings.
Katherine Raue

4th April 2010 - 10:14
O'Leary is lying deliberately, and you are deliberately misinterpreting the facts.The only meeting was AFTER the Deputy Principal XXXXX came and told me that McPhee and the police had told O'Leary and Kennedy that I'd been charged, I told the DP and O'Leary I HADN"T, in response to the false allegation in the letter, and any meeting occurred AFTER I received the letter.
O'Leary is deliberately lying in trying to make out that I ever told him I had been charged.  

4th April 2010 - 10:22
URGENT:Whether or not I may be able to access information through the Court discovery process, I am entitled to the information under the Privacy Act and expect to receive it immediately, IN PARTICULAR ALL THE LETTERS FROM PARENTS TO THE SCHOOL IN PROTEST ABOUT THE ACTIONS OF KENNEDY, POWELL. O’LEARY AND 'WHAIA MICHELLE'.
The refusal of the school to acknowledge the many complaints from parents who support the work I did is an attempt to pervert the course of justice, it is corrupt deceit, the attempt by Diane Swan to manipulate the facts is pitiful, and I request that she is immediately relieved of further involvement in this "investigation" immediately and the Ombudsmen commence a proper investigation immediately.I made a serious allegation of child abuse and it has proven to be well founded and still not investigated, this matter is urgent.  There was no meeting until AFTER I received the letter containing the allegation, Diane Swan, Kennedy, O'Leary, XXXXX, all know that perfectly well and are attempting to pervert the course of justice.
Kate Raue 

8 May 2010 14:12
Diane Swan:
I have told you repeatedly that the meeting was AFTER I received the letter, and all the evidence makes this perfectly clear.
I don't have copies of the emails you refer to, because they were sent from another computer, and have been deleted from that computer without being saved.  Please provide ALL INFORMATION, as requested, including these emails, particularly the one which you refer to in your email, dated 3rd September 2009, IMMEDIATELY.  Please print all the emails out and post to 1 Brooklyn Road Carterton.
I have told you repeatedly the details of the matter in chronological order:
I received a visit from the DP XXXXX informing me of the notes of the Board meeting and her discussion with the staff representative who attended the meeting.
I told XXXXX the allegation was untrue and requested a meeting with the Board and staff.
Then I received the letter from the Board.
AFTER receiving the letter from the Board I went to the school and met with O'Leary and told him that the allegation was untrue.
He told me that he had been told by the Police and Mayor McPhee about the allegation.
I consider that your email is an attempt to pervert the course of justice, you now perfectly well that the only meeting was AFTER I received the letter
I repeat my request that a detailed statement be taken from the former Deputy Principal of the South End School, XXXXXXXX, from whom I requested a copy of the notes of staff representative when Powell told me that she had seen them, regarding this matter, confirming that: 
XXX met with me prior to me receiving the letter.
XXX told me at this meeting that she had seen the notes made by the staff rep of the BoT meeting at which the allegation had been discussed.
I requested a copy of the notes.
I told her the allegation was not true, and told her that I hoped I would not receive such a letter.
I received the letter.
I then requested a meeting wit O'Leary and at that meeting told him that the allegation was untrue, as I had previously told  the DP .
Provide the emails and the letters from the parents immediately, and stop lying about the meeting taking place prior to me receiving the letter - you know perfectly well it didn't!

Katherine Raue

No comments:

Post a Comment