Post a New Topic
Theater employees suspected of embezzlement
Original post made
on May 1, 2008
Palo Alto police suspect Children's Theatre Director Pat Briggs, the late Assistant Director Michael Litfin and Costume Supervisor Alison Williams of embezzlement, according to search-warrant affidavits obtained by the Weekly.
Read the full story here Web Link
posted Thursday, May 1, 2008, 8:37 AM
Like this comment
Posted by Mike
a resident of College Terrace
on May 3, 2008 at 1:43 pm
Vic: "I do agree that we need to let the investigation run its course, and again, hope for a fair and just conclusion"
I don't see that, as in your first post the implication was clear - i.e. your last two sentences "Poor accounting and casual supervision should not be used to justify or rationalize the crimes that may have been committed. Unfortunately, it just made it easier."
In other words, your bias is showing.
You're making a clear implication.
As far as criminality goes, to call what has happened "criminal", to even suggest it in this forum, before all the facts are known - especially given what PACT has meant to this community, and given what those who have run PACT have given to this community - IS a crime. It's a crime committed by people who should know better, and should do their very best to keep their *mouths shut* about the individuals involved, because *nothing* has been *proved beyond a shadow of a doubt*.
And, it's not naive to draw a conclusion that weights the sum total of the suspected actions in the direction of innocent oversight, especially given the vernacular nature of operating an institution like a children's theatre.
Frankly, I'm sick of this entire fiasco. What are we talking about here, some few tens of thousands of dollars, over *decades*? That, in addition to hanging good people out to dry for doing bureaucratic end-runs? Give me a break!
Accusations of hoarding costumes meant to be sold, to aid PACT, treated as a *crime* because city policy wasn't adhered to? (might it occur that *many* organizational policies are often given the "end-around", because bureaucracy and the extreme diligence required by some municipalities makes doing one's job nearly impossible?)?
What the heck is going on here? This is an anthill that has been morphed into a mountain. For what? To satisfy the daily need for a byline? To give voice to a few permanently disaffected Palo Altans? At what COST?????!!!!!!?
I don't fault the police for doing their job as they see fit; I don't fault the press for posting sensationalistic claptrap to sell your eyeballs to advertisers-that's the press' slimy duty, as it caters to anything, no matter how harmful to the community that the press is supposed to "inform" (ha!) - there's nothing like a "public service" that feeds, like a parasite, on everything, and excretes profits on itself, don't you think?); I don't fault the self-appointed protectors of city morality who think their perspective is holy (you appear in that category); I don't fault PACT personnel who run - *almost by necessity* - a very chaotic organization. Have you ever spent any substantial period of time in a large children's theatre, or operated one? You have NO idea!
There is no fault or blame here, only a growing fiasco of misinformation, overreaching, fiscal mismanagement, holier-than-thou pundits and wannabe public lynch mobs, sit-back-and-rake-in-the-advertising-dollars newspapers, and the rest of the usual suspects who come out to celebrate the growing folly of this issue.
There is no crime here, only naive malfeasance.
There is no *balance* on this issue; that was lost, long ago. It's become a sensationalistic pimple that only a certain few around here - for reasons that continue to escape me - nobody wants to pop. Rather, they seem to want it to fester and grow, attaching everything but the kitchen sink to what essentially amounts to NOTHING.
In fact, the irony is that this all amounts to great theatre, with the players - everyone mentioned above - keeping to their scripts, as if directed by some fantastical desire to slowly do themselves in, until everyone in the audience has left.
Last, if there *was* fiscal mismanagement that had been enabled over *decades*, how did this get past policy-making committees, and audits? Who in past policy-making groups is going to take some responsibility for this? I think we all know what the answer to that will be, don't we?
Now on to "Question???", above, who saw fit to post the names of PACT community volunteers.
I am not among those whose names you posted, but if i were, I would henceforth, already, have made a call to my attorney, to demand that the Weekly turn over its IP records for this thread, and *track you down*.
From there I would see to it that you were sued for implied libel. I would further see to it that you spent an inordinate sum of money on your defense. Further, I urge anyone who is on that list to do this, or anyone who knows who "Question???" is, to dig into this and do anything you can to find his/her identity, and see to it that s/he is sued for libel.
Now, to "narnia" whose lightweight, cartoonish name is appropriate to the weight presented in his/her posting: narnia says:" "our moral judgments permit us to speculate or even say" I think so and so is guilty or I think so and so is innocent" based on what has been reported." "
Yes, that's correct, but there are moral strictures that also put heavy weight on "not judging, lest you be judged" and so on - you know the drill. So, get off your friggin' high horse!
The assumptions you make, all based, so far, on hearsay, *do* "permit
you to make those assumptions, but why are you making the assumptions that you are?
Don't hide behind "morality" narnia. The froth coming forth from your mind, and into these forums is bubbling with judgment that points in the direction of guilt. Frankly, it's judgments like yours - the ones that hide behind, and use tacit morality to justify themselves, that are the most corrosive. In short, you are not as "moral" a person as you think you are.
This PACT fiasco reveals Palo Alto's shadow. This is a good place, with good people, but there are those who feast on things like this; they crawl out of the woodwork everytime some small aberration to the norm occurs they cry" DOWN WITH MANAGEMENT!", or DOWN WITH SERVICES!", and our great city be damned. This little, whining group of self-appointed moralists do their best to project their non-horizons, their muffled vision, and their venom into the public square. Who needs them?