Posted by proudparent (anonymous) on April 2, 2009 at 10:10 a.m. (Suggest removal)

This is a very disheartening story. I see that no one has posted any comments thus far. We live in a country where one is persumed innocent until proven guilty - a concept based on "due process" that I wholly support.

Sexual misconduct is a serious allegation whether it involves a person in a position of trust/authority (allegedly) enaging in such conduct with subordinates (let's say a principal engaging in a sexual relationship with a teacher that works under his direct supervision, etc.) or in this case, a person in a position of trust/authority (allegedly) engaing in sexual misconduct with a minor child (who happens to be incarcerated). At this point, the jury is still out.

With so much going on in the world today, we have so much to think about. The following is a series of questions (Food for Thought) sparked by ongoing concern over issues similar to the aforementioned news story.

Questions to ponder:

1. Were there indications based on the former SMS principal's employment history that found him to have been engaged in sexual misconduct (with others (e.g. teachers, students, etc.)?

2. If the answer to question #1 is yes, then what actions where taken to make it difficult for the accused to secure continued employment in positions of trust (e.g. as an educator, etc.)?

3. In the event no actions to circumvent further misconduct, how much cupability does the former SMS principal's previous employer(s) bear?

4. What would you all think if your school system conducted an internal investigation of sexual misconduct on the part of a principal or other school official, yet he/she was allowed to "quietly" be "removed" or even "promoted" to the central office - basically without ramifications? How do you view those in authority that would rather keep things "quiet" than minimize threats and dangers to our most valuable assets (our children)?

5. We do not live in a perfect world, but could this situation reasonably been prevented?

The possible consequences of any guilt associated with this incident brings forth serious ramifications - I can assume that the authorities will pursue due dilligence in taking a close look at the accused person's employment history (including questioning former employers regarding conduct, character, etc., personal life, community service affiliations (e.g. previous convictions and opportunities where he may have come into contact with/or directly supervised youth, etc).

In closing, I would like to say that this post was meant to engage the community in thoughtful discussion. I do understand that in some instances, the accused may be in need of assistance/medical intervention aimed at improving the quality of his/her life while minimizing the threat others.

P.S. Excuse any spelling errors! Please know that I respect the rights of others to disagree with my concerns.

Posted by shadow03 (anonymous) on April 2, 2009 at 8:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)

@proudparent

You bring up many valid points. Unfortunately, I know for a fact that Mr. Harris, who was a married man, was caught by a SMS student having sexual relations with a teacher at the middle school. Very shortly after this incident, Mr. Harris was no longer the principal. The school did not release a statement regarding why he was no longer principal. Dr. Tim Kelly took over for the remainder of the school year. I pose the same question. Why was he allowed to work around children after the incident with the teacher occurred, and unfortunately, it is a fact that it did occur.

Posted by soccerfan (anonymous) on April 3, 2009 at 11:04 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Shadow03 I hope you do not have any skeltons in your closet. Mr. Harris made a mistake that he has paid for with the SMS deal. The problem at SMS has nothing to do with how good of an educator he was for the children of that school. Yes he should not have had that afair with that teacher but who of us are perfect. The answer is no one is perfect, we all have our short falls. Allow the courts to do their job with this and do not pass judgement before the court does.

Posted by proudparent (anonymous) on April 3, 2009 at 11:35 a.m. (Suggest removal)

To shadow03: Based on your comments, it appears that the school division was allegedly aware of sexual misconduct by Mr. Harris, yet actions were not taken to minimize the opportunity for him to secure future positions of authority/trust (including working in the education arena, etc.). If this is true, then everyone at the top of the food chain, including Mr. Charles Turner and the school board where aware of Mr. Harris' actions? What does their response say about their decision-making capabilities?

To soccerfan: I really respect what you have to say - people make mistakes and in some instances second chances are given. On the second hand, I beg to differ that the situation at SMS with the teacher "has nothing to do with how good an educator he [Mr. Harris] was for the children of that school." The litmus test for what defines the role of an educator extends beyond teaching children their ABCs, it also includes character development. Adults, including those entrusted with children and the interests of the public should always be held to a higher standards in terms of conduct. If in fact as shadow03 stated, a student walked in on Mr. Harris and the teacher engaged in inappropriate sexual behavior, how do you think the student's view of the terms "trust", "respect", "honor", "commitment", "justice", etc. would be impacted? Do you believe that student at SMS may have questioned whether or not they would be "safe" under Mr. Harris' supervision? Should students be allowed to pursue education in a safe and productive environment? Just remember that most schools have policies whereas students engaged in such conduct are EXPELLED (and banned to alternative schools, etc).,along with having permanent black marks on their school records indicating illegal behavior. Are we sending the wrong message to students when those in authority are not held to the same standards? As far as the courts "doing their jobs", it only stands to reasons that those on both sides of this issue (defense attorneys and prosecuting attorneys) will seek the "big picture" which may include looking at Mr. Harris' background (e.g speaking with Southampton school officials, etc.). Lastly, does it appear that Mr. Harris may have issues with respecting "boundaries", whether related to children and/or adults? If so, what does this mean for his future as an educator? P.S. Again, I am just offering open dialog on a subject that is impacting society as a whole, so please do not take my comments as insults.

Posted by shadow03 (anonymous) on April 3, 2009 at 7:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)

@ soccerfan

As a matter of fact, I do not have any skeletons in my closet. In fact, I live a fairly simple and boring life. Apparently, Mr. Harris has not "paid for it" because if he had, he would have learned his lesson the first time. I know that nobody is perfect; however, we are supposed to learn from our mistakes, not continue to make them. Unfortunately, if the courts in Southampton County handle this case, Mr. Harris will surely get off with a simple slap on the wrist.

@proudparent

I agree that Southampton County School officials did not handle the situation appropriately. If they had, then I would find it unlikely that Mr. Harris would have been allowed to work around children. I totally agree with what you said to soccerfan. When it comes to using moral behavior, Mr. Harris should have set a better example.

Posted by andweredone (anonymous) on April 3, 2009 at 9:17 p.m. (Suggest removal)

How awful for this community that someone so removed from it (Mr. Harris having been gone for 4 years) has come back to haunt it in such a manner. True, if the allegations into his past were true, (which we don't know for certain only by hearsay), the school system should have dealt with him appropriately and then this situation may not have occurred. We can't change the past. What we should be doing at this time is praying for his family.

Posted by sand2sun (anonymous) on April 4, 2009 at 12:13 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Seems like we should be praying for a new school superintendent, also.

Posted by socoboy (anonymous) on April 5, 2009 at 3:57 p.m.

(This comment was removed by the site staff.)

Posted by soccerfan (anonymous) on April 6, 2009 at 2:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)

If you would read socoboy you would have seen that I post that before he was found quilty. No I do not believe this mistake is okay I was talking about the SMS situation. I am rather close to this case and I would never say it is okay to have sex with children. Do not get on here and put words in my mouth. I never once said what you thought I said. Once again I posted that before Friday and I believe in not quilty until proven quilty.

Posted by proudparent (anonymous) on April 10, 2009 at 10:25 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Response to soccerfan: I did not have the opportunity to read the post by socoboy. Evidently, it was not appropriate for this discussion board. Thank goodness the site staff had the insight to remove the post. Everyone has an opinion but we should all be mindful of how we choose to communicate. The information provided on public forums can be a useful took in improving the quality of life in our communities. Much of what has been said regarding the Harris case has been informative [yet a lot has been hearsay]. Yet, consistently I am reading here that we all share some of the same concerns. Who knows, if these issues are highlighted, we may see progress in effectuating changes that result in improved learning environments for our children.

Posted by kmtu (anonymous) on April 14, 2009 at 1:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Mr. Harris left SMS due to inappropriate behavior with a teacher - not a student. A teacher that he had been caught with in "locked areas", "dark areas" etc. atleast 3 different times. They were both warned - then terminated. If you talk with past students of his before he became a principal you will find he was adored by them. He had a brilliant future - a principal at age 29!! That is almost unheard of! He got along great with everyone and was highly respected. He was a great teacher and a "go to" man if you had a problem. He left many people very disappointed in him after the SMS incident - but the latest is beyond belief. What a shame - he obviously has a problem that he should have sought counceling for.