Bus driver’s schedule at issue in civil rape case
A civil lawsuit against a former Durham School Services bus driver now hinges on whether he was considered off the clock when he allegedly raped a 15-year-old student in a motel.
Durham School Services, the Illinois-based corporation that provides the majority of Hamilton County Schools buses, had no duty to monitor Alexander Rodriguez’s conduct on March
4, 2015, because it was “outside the scope of his employment,” company attorneys argued in a motion to dismiss a $10 million lawsuit.
“He had finished work, had returned his bus to its station, and was off duty at the time of the encounter with the minor child plaintiff, and took the minor plaintiff to a hotel in his own personal vehicle,” attorney Lauren Turner, who is representing Durham, its parent company National Express, and the Hamilton County Board of Education, wrote in an April 24 motion.
Rodriguez, 36, who pleaded guilty to aggravated statutory rape last summer and received four years’ probation, has been fighting this civil lawsuit since his victim’s legal guardians filed it in March 2016. They say Durham is negligent for hiring a man with a prior criminal history, and that Hamilton County can’t wipe its hands clean by simply contracting with a transportation group.
“It’s absurd to think, when a child is entrusted to one of these bus drivers, that the defendants could wipe their hands clean of any responsibility just because the work day ends,” plaintiffs’ attorney Catherine White said Tuesday. “Our position is, the duty to protect that child attaches the minute that child comes into the physical custody of the bus driver, and regardless of what the work hours are,
remains attached until the bus driver relinquishes custody.”
Turner declined to comment Tuesday, but attorneys are scheduled to address a number of outstanding issues June 26 before Circuit Court Judge L. Marie Williams. Turner’s request to dismiss is slated for July 3.
Police say Rodriquez drove a then-15-yearold from his bus at Sale Creek Middle/High School to a loading station, then brought her to the Super 8 hotel at 8934 Lee Highway. There, he forced her to perform oral sex and raped her, the teenager told investigators. The Times Free Press does not identify victims or alleged victims of sexual assault.
Rodriguez told civil attorneys the teenager got on the bus voluntarily and told him she’d been kicked out of the house, records show.
Later that evening, police say, Rodriquez received a call from investigators asking whether he knew the girl’s whereabouts. She had been missing since 9:30 p.m., records show. He quickly drove the teenager back to the Birchwood area then made her get out of the car and walk home, she told investigators.
The girl’s father told the Times Free Press in July 2016 that he started to worry when his daughter didn’t get off the bus at her usual time. He called the school over and over until he reached a teacher, who suggested he contact the girl’s friends. A principal later told him the school had no control over the bus system and had no way of contacting the driver, he said.
White hit on this point in a motion from April, arguing that no one at the school knew the teenager had boarded
“Our office has no objection to allowing travel for employment purposes. However, our policy requires that he obtain the Court’s permission before doing so.” — PROBATION AND PAROLE MANAGER MATTHEW HOLLIS
Rodriguez’s bus.
“It is further believed that principals rarely know who the bus drivers are that service their schools, what routes they are assigned to drive, and which students are assigned to ride with them,” White wrote. “This constitutes a breach of duty to the minor child … no reasonable precautions were in effect to protect the minor child from the foreseeable risk that she would be harmed by the unsupervised and unfettered defendant Rodriguez.”
Whether Rodriguez’s behavior was ‘foreseeable” has been a major theme in the case.
In her motion to dismiss, Turner attached a 1995 Court of Appeals decision that originated in Shelby County supporting her argument.
“We think an action for negligent hiring requires something more than a showing of a past criminal conduct,” one of the justices wrote. “There must be, 1. evidence of unfitness for a particular job, 2. evidence that the applicant for employment, if hired, would pose an unreasonable risk to others [and], 3. evidence the prospective employee knew or should have known the historical criminality of the applicant would likely be repetitive.”
White countered Rodriguez wasn’t eligible for hire in 2013 based on Durham’s own company standards.
Records show he pleaded guilty to two felonies in New Jersey on June 23, 2004: Distribute, dispense or possess controlled substance in a school zone and unlawful possession of a weapon handgun. And Durham’s recruiting manual says applicants with one or more convictions in the last 10 years involving violence, weapons, controlled substances and sex crimes are “ineligible.”
That, however, is an internal hiring guideline that no state or federal law requires Durham to follow, employee Michael Quinn wrote in a court document for Turner’s case. “The manual also states that the area safety representative may review convictions more than 10 years old … so that persons with old criminal records may be employed.
“Because the convictions were nearly 9.5 years old,” Quinn continued, “and he was otherwise qualified to drive, [a different employee] referred Rodriguez’s application to Area Director of Safety Pat Healy, who gave verbal approval.”
Rodriguez has since started driving for Oviedo Trucking, traveling in and out of Tennessee under state ankle monitor supervision, court records show. He received approval to do so from Hamilton County Criminal Court Judge Barry Steelman in February 2017 after his probation officer wrote a letter of approval.
“Our office has no objection to allowing travel for employment purposes,” probation and parole manager Matthew Hollis wrote. “However, our policy requires that he obtain the Court’s permission before doing so.”