The Fresno Bee (Sunday) - - News - Aleksandra Ap­ple­ton: 559-341-3747, @Aleks Ap­ple­ton

Pierce con­cludes the re­port with facts he deems are not in dis­pute, in­clud­ing that Slatic and Asadoo­rian walked past the stu­dent, at which point he made a mock­ing com­ment to them, which caused them to turn. The stu­dent then used pro­fan­ity and made an­other dis­re­spect­ful com­ment, the re­port says.

Af­ter that, Slatic ap­proached the stu­dent and more words were ex­changed, in­clud­ing pro­fan­i­ties from the stu­dent. Slatic then grabbed the stu­dent’s backpack, re­sult­ing in a strug­gle. Af­ter the backpack fell, the stu­dent threat­ened to beat and shoot Slatic.

“The most sig­nif­i­cant dis­pute and the pri­mary fact that is at is­sue in this in­ves­ti­ga­tion is when the stu­dent threat­ened Mr. Slatic,” the re­port says, cit­ing the stu­dent’s state­ment that he ut­tered the threats only af­ter he and Slatic squared off, and Slatic’s ac­count to a cam­pus re­source of­fi­cer that the stu­dent had threat­ened him as the adults were walk­ing past.

The in­ves­ti­ga­tor said the video re­leased by the district doesn’t ap­pear to sup­port Slatic’s ac­count that the stu­dent had ever reached into his backpack.

In an­swer­ing those ques­tions, Pierce said he con­sid­ered the cred­i­bil­ity and plau­si­bil­ity of the state­ments, and that the stu­dent did not ap­pear to have any mo­tive to lie about when he threat­ened Mr. Slatic, since he read­ily ad­mit­ted to the threat, the orig­i­nal mock­ing re­mark, the ex­treme pro­fan­ity and the use of mar­i­juana. On Slatic, Pierce’s opin­ion was dif­fer­ent.

“The fact that Mr. Slatic failed to answer my ques­tions about the in­ci­dent must also be con­sid­ered,” the re­port says. “It is ap­pro­pri­ate to con­sider his lack of co­op­er­a­tion when as­sess­ing his cred­i­bil­ity.”

Slatic said Fri­day he found the in­ves­ti­ga­tor’s as­sess­ment laugh­able.

Pierce’s fi­nal con­clu­sion is that the threat most likely took place as the two squared off to fight and not be­fore Slatic grabbed the backpack.

The district’s re­lease of the re­port in­cludes a state­ment of what was with­held from the re­port, in­clud­ing records that im­pli­cated staff mem­bers, records pro­tected by fed­eral law and records “where on bal­ance the pub­lic in­ter­est served by not dis­clos­ing the record clearly out­weighs the pub­lic in­ter­est served by dis­clo­sure of the record.”

“We note that this re­port is pro­tected as con­fi­den­tial by the at­tor­n­ey­client priv­i­lege,” the state­ment says. “Nonethe­less, the district has de­cided to waive the priv­i­lege and pro­duce the doc­u­ment in an ef­fort to be fully trans­par­ent.”

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.