Carrie O’Connor
Posted by Webmaster in Counselors, FE-MV, Georgia, High Schools, Not Guilty
(8/14/07 – Initial BBT Report)
Carrie O’Connor, 34, of Mount Vernon, Georgia and a Montgomery County High School guidance counselor has been indicted on allegations that she had a sexual relationship with a 16-year-old male student.
Reportedly, Christopher Bowman, a former teacher at the school, reported O’Connor’s alleged behavior to the school’s juvenile probation officer and to the Georgia Professional Standards Commission claiming that the relationship started when O’Connor and the student were returning from a basketball game in Macon. Bowman allegedly quoted the student as indicating that he and O’Connor had sex in O’Connor’s car and in her home.
Allegedly the sexual relationship between O’Connor and the boy occurred between January and July of this year.
O’Connor’s mother, school superintendent Dale Clark, has been quoted in the media as stating that her daughter is entitled to continue working at the high school until she is found guilty of the charge. Clark’s statement is contradicted by officials with other school systems that say that a school employee under indictment can be placed on administrative leave with pay until the issue is resolved.
It is being reported by Vidalia Communications that:
Last week Montgomery High School principal Luke Smith reassigned the student involved to the Tri-County Alternative School after the GBI said the student and Mrs. O’Connor were to have no contact. A day later he was re-admitted to the high school after his lawyer objected to the school’s decision.
Also, according to the same Vidalia Communications report, Mrs. Clark is under investigation by the Professional Standards Commission for possible violation of the Code of Ethics for Educators.
Carrie O’Connor was released from the Irwin County jail on $20,000 mid-day Tuesday following her Monday night arrest.
A report dated today by WTOC in Savannah quotes Montgomery County High School Principal Luke Smith as saying in reference to O’Connor “She’s not here today, but she has been. She’s been here since school started. If she shows up here, as far as I can tell, she will be allowed to work until further notice.”
The following is the OPINION of the webmaster of Bad Bad Teacher:
The initial reports of this case raise very grave issues regarding both the treatment of the alleged victim and the appearance of preferential treatment for the accused on the part of the school and school system administration.Both issues appear, in the opinion of this writer, to arise from the fact that the mother of the accused is the Superintendent of the school district in which the illegal activity is alleged to have taken place and with a student of that district.
That a school principal would attempt to transfer the alleged victim from the school, leaving the alleged criminal in place is simply outrageous and grossly inexcusable and should be grounds for evaluation of the principal’s fitness to retain the position and in fact grounds to evaluate his employment with the school district.
The very appearance of preferential treatment for the accused simply owing to the fact that “her mommy” is the Superintendent of the school system is grounds for the Superintendent to totally step-aside from everything involved with this criminal case and to possibly step-down from her position with the school system.
When it is alleged that children are being victimized by school employees the last thing that society needs, wants or deserves is a family member of the accused in the highest position of authority in the school system.
Update 9/12/07:
The Ethics Committee of the Georgia Professional Standards Commission has recommended that the state revoke the professional credentials of school superintendent Dale Clark and her daughter Carrie O’Connor.
The committee recommends that O’Connor’s credentials be revoked in light of her having been indicted for having sex with a 16-year-old male student. The committee recommends that Clark’s credentials be revoked for her alleged failure to report the inappropriate sexual contact between her daughter and the student, and for the alleged misuse of public funds by permitting family members of school system employees to use school supplied cell phones.
The full Georgia Professional Standards Commission will consider the committee’s recommendations at a meeting tomorrow in Atlanta. Should the Commission vote to revoke either or both women’s credentials it will effectively terminate their employment by the school system, although both will have the option to appeal and/or pursue the matter in the courts.
Update 9/18/07:
The Georgia Professional Standards Commission voted last week to take away the teaching credentials of Carrie O’Connor and those of her mother, Superintendent Dale Clark.
Reportedly O’Connor says that she and her mother plan to appeal the commission’s ruling. They have 30 days to request a hearing before an administrative law judge.
1/31/08 – Trial Scheduled But May Be Delayed
According to a Vidalia Communications report the trial of Carrie O’Connor is currently scheduled for February 11th, however her attorney is requesting a continuance owing to complications following surgery.
04/04/08 – Civil Lawsuit Dropped
The mother of the alleged victim having previously filed lawsuit for $2 million against the Montgomery County Board of Education, the teacher and the school superintendent has withdrawn that lawsuit.
A jury trial for Carrie O’Connor is currently expected in either August 2008 or February 2009.
06/30/08 – Update
The bond revocation hearing for Carrie O’Conner which was set for June 27th has been delayed until July 23rd.
This is the second delay of the hearing. The first delay took place when O’Connor’s attorney asked the judge for more time to prepare. The second delay is reportedly due to illness. The state is seeking to revoke O’Connor’s bond on allegations that she violated her conditions of bond.
On the criminal case, O’Connor has waived her arraignment and entered a not guilty plea.
O’Connor’s alleged victim and his mother are reportedly attempting to obtain a criminal warrant against O’Connor’s mother, Dale Clark, on allegations that she made terroristic threats against them.
The attorney for the mother of the alleged victim who withdrew her civil lawsuit in Montgomery County Superior Court last March has filed a similar lawsuit in federal court. The attorney said, “I have lost faith in the prospect of getting any kind of impartial proceeding in Montgomery County”.
07/24/08 – Carrie O’Connor Jailed
According to a Vidalia Communications report the judge has revoked the bond of Carrie O’Connor and ordered her jailed pending trial, currently set for August.
Reportedly the judge revoked her bond after listening to a “profanity laced tape” allegedly of O’Connor speaking on the telephone with the alleged victim in direct violation of a no-contact order by the judge.
O’Connor is currently being held in the Irwin County Detention Center.
08/14/08 – Trial May Be Delayed, O’Connor Still Jailed
According to a Vidalia Communications report, the attorney for Carrie O’Connor has notified the judge that she is still under a doctor’s care and likely will not be ready for O’Connor’s trial scheduled for next week.
O’Connor’s attorney is seeking a delay in the trial and also the release of her client on “house arrest” until trial.
O’Connor remains jailed due to her bond being revoked for violating her conditions of bond.
08/20/08 – Trial Delayed
The trial of Carrie O’Connor has been delayed until November 17th.
Earlier this week the DA’s office and O’Connor’s attorney agreed to the delay which is the due to illness on the part of O’Connor’s attorney.
O’Connor remains jailed for violating conditions of her earlier bond.
10/08/08 – O’Connor Freed On Bond Again
Reportedly Carrie O’Connor has been once again released on bond, after her $20,000
bond was reinstated by Superior Court Judge Frederick Mullis.
Judge Mullis had previously revoked O’Connor’s bond due to alleged violation of its conditions.
11/10/08 – Change of Venue Sought
Carrie O’Connor’s attorney is seeking a change of venue on behalf of his client.
O’Connor’s trial is currently set for November 17th and her attorney has filed a motion seeking to move the trial out of Montgomery County due to pre-trial publicity.
Among the various reasons O’Connor cites in seeking a change of venue is the coverage the case has received on numerous web sites including badbadteacher.com which O’Connor’s attorney claims has included 428 comments from various citizens of Montgomery County as of October 24, 2008.
11/20/08 – Trial Update
The trial of Carrie O’Connor got underway on Monday with the judge denying O’Connor’s request for a change of venue. A 6 man, 6 woman jury was selected to hear the case. The remainder of the activity on the first day consisted of the judge ruling on defense motions.
On Tuesday, the mother of the alleged victim testified. Rosa Sanchez said although her son, Fabian Pineda, initially denied having sex with O’Connor, he later confessed to her and her husband. Sanchez also testified of a meeting she and her son had with Dale Clark, the mother of Carrie O’Connor and the county school superintendent, in which Clark allegedly told her to keep her son away from O’Connor.
Also testifying on Tuesday was the alleged victim, Fabian Pineda, who testified that he and O’Connor had sex at least four times with two incidents in motels in Dublin, once in her home in Uvalda and once in an apartment in Mount Vernon. The prosecution also introduced Pineda’s cellphone records from February, 2007 which showed six calls totaling over 10 hours to O’Connor’s telephone. The defense challenged the veracity of the boy during cross-examination. The defense contends that some of the text messages allegedly between O’Connor and the boy may have been between O’Connor’s 14-year-old daughter and Pineda whom he admitted to having dated once.
The state rested its case on Wednesday. The last witness for the prosecution was Ladson O’Connor, Carrie O’Connor’s husband who testified that he turned over evidence to the GBI about contacts between his wife and the boy including pictures, letters and testimony about seeing his wife embracing Pineda at their home in Uvalda. He also told the jury he thinks he wife doesn’t need to go to jail, but needs mental help.
The defense presented its case on Wednesday. Carrie O’Connor’s brother, Benjamin Clark and his wife, Erica, testified regarding an O’Connor marriage mediation meeting that took place in February, 2007. They said that Carrie O’Connor sought a divorce because her husband was seldom at home to help with the children and was tired of doing everything herself. They testified that there was no mention of the alleged improper relationship between Carrie O’Connor and Pineda during the mediation effort. However, both reported threatening remarks made by Ladson O’Connor during the meeting including one instance where he allegedly said he would do “whatever it takes to destroy you and your family.”
Also testifying for the defense were Carrie O’Connor and her daughter Catlyn. O’Connor told jurors that her family had befriended the family of Fabian Pineda and that his sisters often visited her home in Uvalda, and that he also visited occasionally. O’Connor denied having sex with the boy told jurors that many of the text messages submitted as evidence by the state were actually sent to Pineda by her daughter using O’Connor’s cell phone.
Catlyn O’Connor testified of a relationship with Pineda. A relationship which started before the allegations about her mother. Catlyn said the relationship never went past the “peck on the cheek” stage. She also told jurors of frequent conversations, text messages, and long phone calls with the boy. She told the jury she’s never been interviewed by the GBI or any other law enforcement agency.
Apparently the question of who sent to Pineda the message that showed a picture of O’connor’s bed with the caption “Wish You Were Here” was not answered by either Carrie or Catlyn O’Connor.
On Wednesday the defense rested and the case is going to the jury Thursday morning.
11/20/08 – Not Guilty Verdict Returned
The Montgomery County Superior Court jury has returned a not guilty verdict after only 30 minutes of deliberation.
The jury foreman was quoted in Vidalia Communications report as saying, “There was not enough concrete evidence to convince they jury beyond a shadow of a doubt that it did actually occur”.
References:
O’Connor Seeks Change of Venue (11/06/08)
O’Connor Released on Bond (10/07/08)
O’Connor Attorney Wants Trial Delay
Bond Revoked for Guidance Counselor, Charged with Sexual Assault (07/23/08)
Former High School Counselor Jailed (07/23/08) (Note: this report will be available only on a short-term basis)
Montgomery Mother Drops Suit (04/04/08)
Superintendent on Paid Leave (9/21/07)
Superintendent, Daughter Lose Licenses in Student Sex Case (9/18/07)
State Committee Recommends Revocation for Montgomery Co Educators (9/12/07) (Note: this report will be available only on a short-term basis)
Montgomery County Guidance Counselor Arrested for Sexual Assault (8/14/07)
“High School Counselor Indicted in Montgomery Co” and “O’Conner Makes Bond” appear temporarily available on the Vidalia Communications Web Site (8/14/07)
Entries (RSS)
October 23rd, 2009 at 9:36 am
Agreed, the jury already had their mind made up, probably before any evidence was presented, however in their defense, not even one third of the evidence, especially the cell phone and computer evidence was not even presented. How could they legally exclude any person in the jury pool who knew certain people in the county? There are some people in the county who are known by everybody.
They could lie about who made the cell phone calls, but they could not possibly have been at her computer during the times they were used to communicate with the victim. Why couldn’t the prosecution figure that out? Why was the GBI not called to testify? Any ACLU lawyer could tear this trial to shreds.
Some very good witnesses for the prosecution were not even called to testify.
The defense was well prepared. After all when you grill a false testimony for a whole day you are bound to get a good performance and that is just what it was-a good performance.
Has anyone ever figured out how much money this performance cost Montgomery County?
Justice-no way. Lies and more lies.
Just be patient, it will all come back to them someday. God is ultimately just, we just have to be patient.
October 5th, 2009 at 8:50 pm
One thing that bothered me about the jury’s verdict in this case was the statement from the jury foreman.“There was not enough concrete evidence to convince the jury beyond a shadow of a doubt that it did actually occur”.The standard to convict is reasonable doubt.Shadow of a doubt means no doubt at all and is a higher standard.It really makes me wonder if this jury understood their job.Then when you look at how much time they deliberated (under 30 min) I start to wonder if they even cared.
October 5th, 2009 at 6:32 pm
Good question. What did happen to all those cell phone messages and computer messages?
Who or what made them disappear or not be used as evidence? All lies. Pay day will be someday.
Ruined many lives and what for?Hers, the boy, her daughter, and her children, and don’t forget her extended family. Hopefully they will not follow her good example.
If she was not guilty, why does she still stay in touch with him?
Is she more open with it now that the boy is older? But so is she? Older that is.
Hasn’t she done enough damage to that boy and his family?
Why won’t she leave him alone?
September 20th, 2009 at 5:41 pm
I really can not believe this woman ‘got off’ this is a total miscarriage of justice if ever i’ve seen one. It is clear that Granny Clark railroaded her grand-daughter into testifying. Why was the question of who sent the text of Mrs O’Connor’s bed with ‘Wish you were here right now’ not addressed? The daughter testified her relationship with the victim never went further than ‘peck on the cheek’ well if that is the case you would not send that type of text would you?
This matter totally leaves a bad taste in my mouth – in my gut i feel she is guilty and got away with it because of who she is related to and that is not fair – have a happy life Carrie cos it aint gonna be pretty when you die that for sure.