Editor’s note: The following release from Jeffery Sowa, attorney representing Rosemary Healey, was received yesterday afternoon:
On behalf of my client, Rosemary Healey, we wish to respond to …
This item is available in full to subscribers.
We have recently launched a new and improved website. To continue reading, you will need to either log into your subscriber account, or purchase a new subscription.
If you are a current print subscriber, you can set up a free website account by clicking here.
Otherwise, click here to view your options for subscribing.
Please log in to continue |
|
Editor’s note: The following release from Jeffery Sowa, attorney representing Rosemary Healey, was received yesterday afternoon:
On behalf of my client, Rosemary Healey, we wish to respond to the release of the Vincent A. Ragosta report as follows:
The Warwick School Committee claims to have hired Vincent A. Ragosta, Jr. to conduct a fair and impartial investigation of the Mario Atoyan employment matter. Unfortunately, the report and the investigation that preceded it were neither fair nor impartial. The information related to the investigation that has been released is incomplete, biased, and inaccurate. Minimally and notably absent from these reports are the actual witness statements, all emails exchanged between Mr. Ragosta and individual members of the School Committee and any other documents considered. Since May of last year, Ms. Healey has communicated her concerns about the lack of fairness and impartiality to the Warwick School Committee and/or some of its members verbally and in writing. She also requested, in writing, on multiple occasions that she either be allowed to either listen to the report as delivered and/or receive copies of the report in its entirety to enable her to demonstrate the lack of fairness and partiality. Her requests have been repeatedly denied.
Ms. Healey was only given a copy of the Ragosta report last week without the supporting materials. Those supporting materials are essential to our ability to demonstrate the lack of partiality demonstrated by Mr. Ragosta. At a minimum, in our opinion, those supporting materials will demonstrate that Mr. Ragosta lacked factual basis for his conclusions and/or based more than one of his conclusions on statements taken out of context.
Ms. Healey served the Warwick Public Schools and School Committee with distinction for 20-plus years. Her countless achievements and longstanding loyalty to this school district should not be stained by this obvious attempt to scapegoat the outrageous actions of another.
Ms. Healey enjoys certain constitutional rights including without limitation the right to notice, an opportunity to be heard and the right to confront her accusers. Said rights have routinely been afforded to employees of the Warwick Public Schools, but unfortunately, not to Ms. Healey.
We respectfully ask that the people whom she has served so admirably withhold any judgment until the complete story is revealed.
Jeffrey D. Sowa
Attorney for Rosemary Healey
2 comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here
Justj1969
Are you kidding me? What about the constitutional rights of my daughter? The main thing that seems to be missing is the concern of the children involved.. I pity you not! Gross negligence is clear.. On the part of the administration.. Point fingers all you want. They failed and my child suffered.. Thanks? Not? You failed to do due diligence Ms Healy, sorry the rug had been lifted. I didn't lie down then and I certainly will not now. You didn't even investigate, mr popular won.. As Ragosta said innocent till proven guilty, I agree. But shame on all of you for ignoring us.
Signed disgusted
Tuesday, April 12, 2016 Report this
veritas
Dear Mr. Sowa,
Your client has engaged in cover ups, harassment, illegal labor practices, perjury, obstruction, destruction of records and numerous other despicable behaviors while collecting a check from Warwick. There was no honorable service by Rosemary Healey.
You don't want the whole story to be revealed. I guarantee you that your client has not offered you the truth.
Friday, June 3, 2016 Report this