|Judge Ahler's letter to Barbara Abeyta dated February 13, 2003, two days
AFTER THE DECISION HAD BECOME FINAL.
|Why did Judge
provide a copy
of the decision
to Abeyta and
Olson before it
Was he afraid they
might object to the
blatant falsehoods it
If so, his
to have been
Olson appear to
have no interest
in whether or not
the decision they
signed is illegal
Abeyta continues to
serve as a
representative to the
|What did Barbara Abeyta and Terry Olson get for being docile, cooperative and supportive
of Judge Ahler's arbitrary and illegal actions?
They got the almost identical letters below sent to their school district superintendents.
|Letter to Terry Olson's Superintendent
|Letter to Barbara Abeyta's
|Copyright © 2006 Maura Larkins' San
Diego Education Report. All Rights
panelists now know that
their decision was
illegal, but refuse to ask
that it be set aside. But
letters (see below) from
James Ahler indicate that
they signed the decision
without discussing it, and
without reading it.
Judge Ahler like
sheep, with no
for the truth or
|The Falsely-Dated Decision Page of the 28-Page Decision of the
Maura Larkins' Case at the Office of Administrative Hearings; Olson
and Abeyta signed it without discussing or even seeing the "findings
Judge James Ahler
The San Diego Union
Tribune reported that
"an administrative law
judge with the State
Personnel Board ruled
Ahler violated his
duty as a judge...
"'Such conduct does not
comply with the law,
does not promote public
confidence in the
integrity of the judiciary
and demeans the
judicial office,' Judge
William A. Snyder
the Canons of
Judicial Ethics in his
|Members of the COMMISSION signed outright falsehoods.
|Panelist felt an obligation to
CTA (which wanted to cover
up crimes), but no
obligation to tell the truth
|Barbara Abeyta, representative,
National City Elementary Teachers Association,
signed the decision as OAH panelist in the Maura
Larkins case. The California attorney general's
office reported to Maura Larkins that Ms. Abeyta,
in serving on the OAH panel, felt an obligation as a
union representative. Clearly, Ms. Abeyta felt no
obligation to honor the rights of a fellow teacher,
only to be loyal to the union.
Questions for Barbara Abeyta
1) Did CTA pressure you to keep quiet?
2) Did Mary Kay Rosinski arrange for CTA
Attorney Emma Lehaney to help you get out of
testifying in the Schulman case?
|Judge James Ahler
made it clear in his
decision that he did not
have ANY CONCERN AT
ALL for Maura Larkins'
students who lost their
On Feb 12, 2001, in the middle of their critical
transition year to English-only instruction,
Maura Larkins' students were given a series of
substitutes who knew very little about how to
teach that class.
Judge Ahler claimed that it was perfectly
acceptable that the district took Maura Larkins
out of her classroom for seven weeks, then,
after asking Maura Larkins twice to come back
during that school year, each time demanded
that she leave again.
Judge Ahler had before him evidence that Asst.
Superintendent Rick Werlin was running around
desperately looking for someone who would
make an allegation against Maura Larkins.
Gretchen Donndelinger's notes showed how
hard he tried, and how unsuccessful he was.
Attorney Mark Bresee of Parham & Rajcic
either instructed or advised Werlin to violate
the law again and again, or was willing to accept
taxpayer money for covering up school district
wrongdoing, or both.
James Ahler clearly did not care about Maura
Larkins' students, yet he dishonestly pretended
to care about STUDENTS IN A CLASS AT A
DIFFERENT SCHOOL WHO NEVER MET MRS.
|James Ahler, Terry Olson
and Barbara Abeyta signed
a compendium of Findings
and Legal Conclusions
which is staggering in its
2. THE COMMISSION
EDUCATION CODE SECTIONS
44932(a)(7), 44932(a)(5) and
A. The COMMISSION
misconstrued the meanings of
“persistent” and “reasonable” in the
context of “persistent violation of and
refusal to obey the school laws of the
state or reasonable regulations
prescribed by the governing Board” in
CALIFORNIA EDUCATION CODE
B. The COMMISSION
misconstrued the meaning of
“evident unfitness for service” in
CALIFORNIA EDUCATION CODE
C. The COMMISSION
misconstrued “willful refusal to
perform regular assignments
without reasonable cause, as
prescribed by reasonable rules and
regulations of the employing school
district” in CALIFORNIA EDUCATION
CODE SECTION 44939. The
COMMISSION construed this section
of the law by proceeding as if the
word “reasonable” were nowhere to
D. The COMMISSION failed to
consider Maura Larkins’ Affirmative
Defenses, including hostile
environment, and to properly
construe the law regarding such
E. The COMMISSION
improperly construed the
F. The COMMISSION failed to
consider rights of Maura Larkins
according to the contract, the
Constitution, and the laws of
|To Barbara Abeyta, Judge Ahler signed his
name as "Jim Ahler." Unlike Olson, Abeyta
didn't get an invitation to stop by.
|Letter to Judge Ahler, Terry Olson, and Barbara Abeyta from
In the interest of justice, why don't you petition the court to set
aside your decision? In your defense, you did not know that
CVESD and CTA were guilty of crimes when you signed your
But you knew that you were ignoring the law and the evidence.
Why not do the right thing? Why not do as the state of Alabama
is now doing in the Rosa Parks case? Unfortunately, Alabama
waited until Rosa Parks was dead. Can you do better than that?
No, I didn't think so. I just wanted to point out that you could, if
you wanted, right the wrong you have committed.