Welcome

Blue Valley School District Scapegoats a 3rd Grade Boy for an Apparent Anti-Gay Bullying Incident to Prevent a Title IX Lawsuit by the Mother of the Victim, Who is a Judge

Top School District in Kansas subsequently sues the boy’s parents in retaliation for filing a complaint with Department of Education

Criminal False Communication by Blue Valley

  • My 8-year-old and 10-year-old children, and their mother who was a teacher’s aide at Wolf Springs Elementary, were all made the scapegoats for an infamous bullying incident (that passed as anti-gay) and were forced to transfer to another school by Blue Valley in February, 2023, because a Judge parent demanded so.
  • Blue Valley wanted to appease the Judge mother, Joann Woltman, to avoid a Title IX lawsuit, even though our family had nothing to do with the apparent anti-gay bullying the Judge’s son was subjected to. To justify our family’s transfer, the district framed both of my children for making threats.
  • After the transfer, the district made our entire family subject to harassment to nudge us out of the district and to prevent us from revealing the truth. We faced retaliation every time we shared the truth with others.
  • We are now suing the Superintendent, the board attorney, and other Blue Valley officials for First Amendment retaliation (see our “Second Amended Complaint“).
  • We urge Blue Valley and Judge Woltman to sue us for defamation if our claims are false.
  • On February 8, 2023, a bullying incident happened in our younger son’s (D.U.) 3rd grade class. A group of students stood on chairs and tables, chanted “A… is gay”, held signs saying “A… is gay”. The target of this bullying was A.W., the son of Joann Woltman, who is a judge in the Johnson County Courthouse, Kansas.
  • This bullying incident, which was confirmed by the school principal Meaghan Graber in her email exchange with us, created a big disruption in the community, and many parents mentioned the incident on social media.
  • February 9, 2023, was a snow day, and on February 10, 2023, both D.U. his brother A.U., along with their mother Xiaolei Xu, were made to leave the school for good. The family members were subsequently transferred to other schools. 
  • Blue Valley closed the case by scapegoating D.U. for the disruptions happening in that class, although D.U. stood up for A.W. against his bullies during the incident.
  • Specifically, Blue Valley officials promised Woltman to discipline D.U., in order to avoid a Title IX lawsuit by the Woltman family.
  • Superintendent Tonya Merrigan experienced a Title IX lawsuit arising from anti-gay bullying in her early career in Blue Valley (see “Clark vs. Blue Valley“), and recently faced another Title IX lawsuit (see (McCallum vs. Blue Valley“).
  • Title IX remains to be the main legal claim made by bullying victims against public schools.

Murder List and Bomb Hoaxes at Wolf Springs Elementary

  • The police report dated February 10, 2023 (Overland Park Police Department, Case Number 2023002771) shows that the school principal found no threat on the day D.U. was secluded and banned from the educational setting on February 10, 2023 (see “Publicly available version of the police report”).
  • The Overland Park School Resource Officer who investigated the murder list and bomb allegations also found no threat whatsoever and concluded that D.U. could go back to the educational setting on the same day.
  • According to the same police report, there was no murder list, and D.U. did not even know what a murder list was. The source of all the allegations was one female classmate’s oral report. In other words, the whole thing was because of a “Karen call.”
  • However, Blue Valley had already decided that D.U. was going to function as a scapegoat and serve Blue Valley’s political agenda. As a result, D.U. was transferred by Blue Valley to another school following a series of publicly humiliating announcements (see “Murder list announcements”).
  • When D.U.’s parents opposed this scandalous disciplinary action, however, Blue Valley retaliated against them by;
    • framing a case against D.U.’s brother, who was a student at the same school, and transferring him to another school along with D.U.
    • reassigning D.U.’s mother, who was working as a teacher’s aide in the Chinese Immersion program at the same school, as a special education teacher’s aide to another school’s intense resource classroom, which was meant for students with severe disabilities
  • Overall, Blue Valley portrayed D.U., his brother, and his father as safety threats and accused all three of causing community wide disruption by threatening to shoot up the school, by making bombs to blow up the school, and by threatening Blue Valley officials and faculty on social media, respectively (see a Word copy of the infamous post that gave rise to Blue Valley’s accusations “Father’s infamous Facebook post”, a screenshot is not possible as D.U.’s father was removed from the Facebook group after Blue Valley’s accusations).
  • By portraying D.U. and his brother and father that way, Blue Valley invoked stereotypes of Middle Eastern boys and men as violent and dangerous. However, D.U.’s and A.U.’s educational records unequivocally show that they have no history of behavior issues. Similarly, their father, who is a College Professor with a PhD, has no history of violence or aggression.     
  • Blue Valley spread the lie among its staff about D.U.’s father threatening their officials and teachers, and later improperly and unfairly banned him from accessing the school property and staff.
  • Since then, D.U.’s parents have witnessed Blue Valley using not only its own resources, but also many individuals and agencies outside its organization as proxies to drive the entire family out of the district and to prevent D.U.’s parents from spreading the truth and rocking the boat.
  • After Blue Valley revealed that D.U. and his brother A.U. had been transferred to another school, Amy Farthing, a district executive, suggested in an email that the parents consider alternative schooling options, namely virtual learning and homeschooling (see “Kids are happiest at home” attached).
  • The emails D.U.’s father sent to Blue Valley personnel were blocked between April and August, 2023, without informing neither him nor the Blue Valley personnel he was trying to communicate with, including a district executive and several personnel in three different schools.
  • Blue Valley created a hostile environment for D.U. at school and then reported him as truant three times in three academic years. In general, Blue Valley used truancy threats as a stick that made alternative schooling options look like carrots. 
  • Blue Valley’s Superintendent threatened to sue D.U.’s father for defamation if he did not stop talking about the murder list hoax (see “Superintendent’s empty threats” attached).
  • Blue Valley colluded with the following individuals from outside agencies to achieve its aim of whitewashing the murder list and bomb hoaxes:
    • the student-rights lawyer Clifford Cohen who was briefly retained by the family after the murder list hoax, to legitimate the improper and unfair actions it took against the entire family and to make it look on paper as if the family was given due process.Guardian Ad Litem Dennis Stanchik to shift the blame for D.U.’s truancy to D.U. and the entire family and to discredit the parents.psychotherapist Tish Taylor to rubberstamp its own psychoeducational evaluations that made D.U. and A.U. out to be students with behavior issues, in striking contrast to their educational and medical history, as well as to everyone who have known these children in some capacity.

Criminal Legal Malpractice by Student Rights Lawyer Clifford Cohen

  • After Blue Valley officials decided that D.U. was going to be a scapegoat, they used Clifford Cohen to legitimate the scandalous disciplinary action they took against D.U. and his entire family. Specifically, just because D.U.’s family attended a meeting with Blue Valley officials and were represented by Clifford Cohen in that meeting, Blue Valley, by all outward appearances, gave the family due process.
    • In reality, however, Clifford Cohen represented the family for a few hours only. Blue Valley did not produce the findings of its investigation into D.U.’s alleged threats for the parents, and did not allow the parents to tell their side of the story (see “You had your attorney”). The only evidence Blue Valley shared with D.U.’s parents was his silly artwork (see “The artwork”), and the parents were shushed by both Blue Valley’s General Counsel and by Defendant Cohen when they began asking questions about the investigation into D.U.’s alleged threats.
  • Clifford Cohen and Blue Valley had a mutually beneficial relationship: Blue Valley generated clients and hence income for him, and he in return legitimated the disciplinary actions Blue Valley took against his clients.
  • D.U.’s parents filed a legal malpractice lawsuit against Clifford Cohen (see “Second Amended Petition”).
    • Clifford Cohen did nothing to defend the family, but instead pushed the family to stomach the outcome imposed on them by Blue Valley (see “Your decision” attached)The parents were not able to find any case related to Clifford Cohen in the Johnson County Courthouse, even though he seems to have roots in the county (considering his office is in Johnson County and his grandkids attend Blue Valley schools).
    • Defendant Cohen’s attorneys refuse to produce his CV and his litigation history for Plaintiffs. Moreover, they refuse to produce information about how many of his clients were Blue Valley students/parents and how much of his income he generated as a student rights lawyer came from these students/parents.
  • D.U.’s parents are prepared to go public with their claims and call for all of Clifford Cohen’s former clients to come forward with information about their own cases.

Abuse of Power by Guardian Ad Litem Dennis Stanchik

  • Blue Valley wanted to drive the entire family out of the district and used truancy laws towards this aim.
  • Blue Valley allowed or facilitated the rumors about A.U. and D.U., which spread like wildfire at the school they were transferred to. As a result, both A.U. and D.U., and especially the latter, were treated by peers and teachers with prejudice. As a result, D.U. had serious school avoidance issues and stopped going to school in April, 2023.
  • Consequently, D.U.’s parents asked the school principal to dispel the rumors about D.U. and to make the school safe for him. In response, the principal threatened to report truancy if D.U. did not enroll in virtual learning or in another school (see “1st truancy threat and push for virtual learning”).
  • D.U. began attending another Blue Valley school in August, 2023. Throughout his time at school, D.U. was treated differently by school staff, who received certain instructions to do so from the district.
  • As a result, D.U. again began having school avoidance issues, and Blue Valley reported him as truant in late September or early October, 2023.  
  • On October 5, 2023, Dennis Stanchik was assigned as the Guardian Ad Litem of D.U. by the truancy court.
  • Dennis Stanchik talked to D.U.’s parents only once, on November 3, 2023. Their conversation was via Zoom and lasted half an hour.
  • Dennis Stanchik never talked to D.U. He saw D.U. only once, through Zoom, when D.U. briefly appeared during his first truancy hearing on November 9, 2023.
  • Dennis Stanchik has never been to D.U.’s house. To the best of the parents’ knowledge, Dennis Stanchik never interviewed anyone close to D.U. at school or outside the school. To the best of the parents’ knowledge, Dennis Stanchik never went to school to meet with or to observe D.U.
  • Yet, Dennis Stanchik attributed D.U.’s truancy to the so-called mental health issues going on in the family. As a result, he demanded mental evaluations of D.U. and his parents during a truancy hearing in early January, 2024 (see “GAL’s push for mental evaluations”).
  • Dennis Stanchik also requested the parents to sign release of information forms with the evaluators so that he could “prime” them (by letting them know what is “wrong” with the parents) before they conduct the evaluations. He made it clear that he wanted to reach out to the evaluators prior to the evaluation, rather than after the evaluation.
  • When the parents challenged Dennis Stanchik’s rationale during the truancy hearing, the judge threatened to take D.U. away from his parents if they did not proceed with the mental evaluations. The judge explicitly ordered the parents during at least one hearing to do the mental evaluations for D.U. and for themselves, as well as to sign the release of information papers for Dennis Stanchik so that he could access the evaluators.
  • When D.U. and his father subsequently went to the District Courthouse and made an inquiry with one of the clerks, however, they were told that there was no such court order. Moreover, the parents received the previous court orders by mail before December 2023, but they received no court orders in writing afterwards. All the court orders from January, 2024 onwards were stated by the judge orally during the hearings, all of which took place via Zoom.
  • Neither the judge nor Dennis Stanchik elaborated on their allegations against the parents, i.e., why D.U. and his parents needed mental evaluations, despite the multiple inquiries the parents made during hearings and in writing (see “GAL fishes for mental problems”).        
  • Overall, Dennis Stanchik’s intention was to make it look like the family proceeded with the mental evaluations of their own will, not because they were forced to do so.
  • The truancy court also triggered an educational neglect investigation on the parents by reporting them to the Department for Children and Families (DCF). DCF subsequently ruled that the educational neglect allegation against the parents was not substantiated.
  • It is well-known that truancy threats, reports to Child Protection Services or Department for Children and Families, and demands for mental evaluations of the student and his/her family members are tools used by school districts to retaliate against families for defending their parent rights.
  • On January 29, 2024, D.U. got punched in the back by a strange student in the bathroom when he was walking towards the sink to wash his hands after urinating. When he turned around, he got kicked in his genital area very hard twice. He told about the incident to his friends in the classroom, who encouraged him to report the incident to the classroom teacher, which he did.
  • After school, however, the school principal sent the parents an email saying that D.U. was given an out of school suspension because he made derogatory remarks about a classmate (specifically, D.U. said that she was mean) and violated her personal space.
  • Between January 31 and February 2, 2024, D.U. saw doctors to get the impact of the bathroom attack checked, which included an ultrasound check as recommended by his pediatrician.
  • Dennis Stanchik did not show any interest in this incident, nor in Deniz’s health or well-being. He only emailed the parents to demand the doctor’s notes in the hope of finding a day of unexcused absence that he can use against the family in truancy court (see “GAL’s reaction to the bathroom incident”).
  • On February 21, 2024, D.U.’s father succumbed to the pressure the family had been receiving from Dennis Stanchik as well as from the truancy court, unenrolled D.U. from Blue Valley, and registered for homeschooling.
  • Since the very outcome that Blue Valley desired and engineered has been achieved, truancy court dismissed the case against D.U. on February 29, 2024. 
  • On October 30, 2024, Blue Valley reported D.U. as truant for the third time, even though he was no longer enrolled in Blue Valley and the parents had informed various Blue Valley officials and representatives that their son was receiving education elsewhere (see “Third truancy report”).
  • D.U.’s parents are prepared to go public with these claims and call for all of Dennis Stanchik’s clients who have had similar experiences with him in truancy court in the past to come forward with information.

Fraud by Psychotherapist Tish Taylor

  • Psychotherapist Tish Taylor was hired to evaluate D.U. and A.U. by their parents after they were traumatized by the murder list and bomb hoaxes.
  • Tish Taylor’s strangely consulted with Blue Valley’s board attorney Melissa Hillman to write her report on D.U. Blue Valley did not allow Tish Taylor to talk to D.U.’s teachers at school, and instead directed her to Melissa Hillman, who is a lawyer and not an educator, and who does not know D.U. one bit. However, Tish Taylor incorporated the information she received from Melissa Hillman into the evaluation report she wrote for D.U. In that sense, Melissa Hillman was a secret rater in D.U.’s evaluation.
  • There were similarly irregularities with A.U.’s evaluation. E.g., Tish Taylor again was not allowed to talk to A.U.’s teachers. She also (again) did not make an attempt to observe A.U. in a social or educational setting.
  • Similar to D.U.’s evaluation, A.U.’s evaluation results were in striking contrast to his educational history, and his parents’ input was not at all reflected in the results. Further, Tish Taylor’s conclusions looked like a carbon copy of Blue Valley’s conclusions.
  • Moreover, Tish Taylor was visibly uncomfortable when A.U.’s father met with her to discuss A.U.’s report, which was a part of the service Tish Taylor provided as part of the evaluation. During that meeting, Tish Taylor made it clear that she did not want to deal with either D.U. or A.U. anymore.    
  • As part of the due process complaint they filed with the Kansas State Department of Education against Blue Valley in May 2024, D.U.’s parents served a subpoena to Tish Taylor to produce the data collection sheets that she used in her psychoeducational evaluation of D.U. (see “Subpoena to Tish Taylor”). Tish Taylor’s attorney objected to this subpoena on August 22, 2024.
  • On August 30, 2024, Tish Taylor’s attorney filed a motion to quash the parents’ aforementioned subpoena (see “Tish Taylor’s motion to quash” attached). Her motion unequivocally manifested input from Melissa Hillman. D.U.’s father called this motion “motion to whitewash data manipulation.” (see “Parents’ motion to compel discovery”).
  • The parents are prepared to go public with their claims and call for all of Tish Taylor’s former clients with similar experiences (i.e., those who paid her to get a second opinion but found her to be nothing but a rubber stamp for Blue Valley) to come forward with information.

Collusion between Kansas State Department of Education and Blue Valley Against Parents

  • D.U.’s father reported Blue Valley’s mishandling of the murder list hoax to KSDE board members in April, 2023. He received no response, and later found out that KSDE had blocked his emails when he received a notice from his email provider stating so.
  • In early January 2024, Plaintiff filed a formal complaint with KSDE. His emails initially did not go through. As a result, he used another email account to file his complaint.
  • The investigator assigned to the case, Diana Durkin, talked to D.U.’s father on the phone for around 25 minutes, and that was the only significant information exchange between the two.
  • Yet, Diana Durkin had had a phone conversation with the Special Education Director of Blue Valley, Mark Schmidt, beforehand, and then she had a Zoom meeting with both Mark Schmidt and Melissa Hillman after her conversation with D.U.’s father.
  • In their phone conversation, Diana Durkin did not ask D.U.’s father for more evidence. She also did not do a field investigation to gather evidence, although Plaintiff had requested that in his complaint, as virtually all the evidence and witnesses are exclusively controlled by Blue Valley and parents are unable to access them.
  • During the same phone conversation, Diana Durkin steered the conversation away from the issues stated in the complaint, such as the violation of the parent right to participate in D.U.’s evaluation and the objectiveness and transparency of the evaluation, and towards irrelevant topics such as the utility of the assessment tools used in the evaluation (see “Diana Durkin’s report“).   
  • In early May 2024, D.U.’s father filed a due process complaint with KSDE, which initially did not go through. As a result, he had to use an alternate email account to file his complaint.
  • During the proceedings, the Hearing Officer assigned by the KSDE sided with Blue Valley, which refused to produce its internal email communications regarding parents’ children, on the grounds that it cost too much to search for and review those emails.
  • On the other hand, Blue Valley voluntarily produced all the email exchanges between Blue Valley and the parents, which amounted to nearly 1,500 documents. In other words, Blue Valley has all the time and money it needs to search for and review parents’ emails, but not its internal emails.
  • On September 4, 2024, the due process Hearing Officer held a status conference, in which she severely restricted the parents’ discovery request regarding BVSD’s internal emails about their children. Specifically, the Hearing Officer ordered the parents to provide fewer and fewer and more specific search terms, shorten the timeframe, and further narrow down the BVSD employees whose emails would be subject to search. 
  • On the same status conference, Blue Valley’s legal team presented D.U.’s father with a fait accompli, stating that they would outsource the already severely restricted email search to a vendor and file a motion to shift the search cost to the parents. The proposal shocked D.U.’s father, but the Hearing Officer seemed to have been pre-informed about it (see “Blue Valley’s motion to shift email search costs”).
  • D.U.’s father objected to the proposal, stating that the parents were entitled to all the internal emails if they were going to pay for the search. D.U.’s father also expressed his willingness to be involved in the vendor selection process, but the Hearing Officer dismissed him by virtually vouching in advance for the vendor that BVSD would potentially choose.
  • On September 20, 2024, the due process Hearing Officer ruled in favor of Tish Taylor’s motion to quash, based on the strangest excuse that the parents’ opposing motion did not state the relevance of the information requested from Tish Taylor to the due process proceeding (see “Order quashing the subpoena to Tish Taylor”). Thus, the parents were barred from accessing the data that formed the basis of the evaluation reports they paid Tish Taylor to write about their children. 
  • KSDE assigned a subsequent and substantively different due process complaint the parents filed on September 1, 2024, to the Hearing Officer presiding over the parents’ first complaint. That way, the KSDE engineered the consolidation of the parents’ new due process complaint with their old complaint, thereby effectively barring the parents from filing new due process complaints, which is a violation their parent rights pursuant to K.A.R. 72-3415 (f) (1) and (2):
  • “Nothing in this section shall be construed to preclude a parent or an agency from filing a separate due process complaint on an issue different from issues presented in a due process complaint already filed…Upon motion of either party and if deemed appropriate by the due process hearing officer presiding in the initial hearing, the issues raised in the separate complaints may be considered and resolved in the same due process hearing.”
  • By then, D.U.’s parents had figured out that parent complaints with KSDE were meant for whitewashing Blue Valley’s wrongdoings, so that parents’ cases could be irrevocably prejudiced and did not make it to the next level, i.e., the Federal Court.
  • Parents call for everyone who has filed a complaint with KSDE against Blue Valley to come forward with information and to join them in a class action lawsuit against both KSDE and Blue Valley.