Briggs' attorneys challenge police statements Crimes & Incidents, posted by Editor, Palo Alto Online, on May 2, 2008 at 12:04 am
Attorneys for Pat Briggs, the embattled director of the Palo Alto Children's Theatre, sharply accused Palo Alto police investigators Thursday of misinterpreting innocuous facts and "stringing them together to make them look more sinister."
Read the full story here Web Link posted Thursday, May 1, 2008, 2:43 PM
Posted by pete, a resident of the Professorville neighborhood, on May 2, 2008 at 12:04 am
The attorneys "had not had a chance to review the affidavits" but as usual went into attack mode before they had read them. They've made statements that are unsubstantiated and are matters of opinion, not proof.
However, many will grasp on these opinions as facts and use them to justify their defense of the PACT personnel. Let's wait for the wheels of justice to finish grinding before deciding the case.
Posted by Sean Mahoney, a resident of the Old Palo Alto neighborhood, on May 2, 2008 at 9:06 am
The attorneys in this case are simply exposing the city's incredibly slow investigation for what it is. The gist of the story here seems to be that the city's policy was to write checks to city employees for personal expenses while on the theatre's trips. From another article in the Daily today it appears these checks were for personal expenses and not necessarily a forward for only what was spent. In terms everyone can understand, these were per diem checks. Am I committing a criminal act when I don't spend all of my per diem checks? No, I did what we all do, I try to live under that allotment so I can make a bit more money. These employees in particular spent all of their time working at the theatre, giving back in effort and financially to the theatre and the kids and took one vacation together in the summer. There is nothing criminal about this situation where the city doesnt have the accounting practices they now wish they had. The city manager who oversees the day-to-day workings of the city has gone back to scrutinize a set of circumstances that occurred years ago and were above board. If you want to update city accounting procedures by all means do it but don't crucify dedicated employees that worked under the previous system.
Posted by pete, a resident of the Professorville neighborhood, on May 6, 2008 at 3:00 pm
Sean. Do you know for a fact that the checks issued were for per diem expenses?
I worked in private industry and when issued per diem money, I was expected to make an accounting for all expenses and return the balance. Any remainder was not considered part of remuneration for working for the company.
I took vacations with my own money, not the company's. And I, too, often worked overtime without pay. The people in question were/are City government employees and should be held accountable in the same way that employees in private industry are.