Tuesday, March 09, 2004
(As the letter was done rather hastily, it has errors which I am correcting now. Too bad I have already sent it to the principal)
08 March 2004
Mr. Alfred S. Sagum
Principal - DLSZ
Dear Mr. Sagum,
My daughter, Keshia Marie, of Freshmen E, was given a PTC by Mr._______ last February 20, 2004 for “bullying that involves intimidation” (whatever that means... obviously, the guy couldn't differentiate one from the other) and was given a Category C penalty for it. I would like to appeal the decision on the following grounds:
1. My daughter does not have any hand in the issue. She merely called the complainant for a brief discussion on a problem that seems to brew between (her friends and the girl in question)them. It has been a time-honored principle for civilized societies to “talk it out” every time a conflict arises. How could this have been “bullying” in the eyes of Mr. _____ is beyond comprehension.
2. Mr. _____ claimed to my wife that Kim challenged the complainant to a fight as alleged by the latter. My daughter denied this. Nowhere in her
letter has she admitted to have done this sort of thing. This made the
case a question of fact. When one is faced with a question of fact, one
should ascertain what, as close as possible, is the truth. Allegations (of)
[to] this nature should be supported by proof as the investigating body was
nowhere near the incident and relies only on the basis of the evidences
presented. (Even the hardest criminal is presumed innocent until proven guilty) This made me, and my wife, believe that Mr. _____ only
listened to one side of the story hence has denied my child justice. His
so-called “investigation” was merely to go through the motions to dispense
with the due process procedure.
3. The penalty should be commensurate with the offense. We like to inform you that Mr. _____’s decision carries with it a suspension of two days, a DP status for one year etc. which I believe is an overkill when a mere
warning should have been sufficient. When asked why he has given a
“bullying that involves intimidation” was given, Mr. _________ said because one of my daughter’s companions is big. He further stated that Kim has a very strong personality unlike Kraiganne, like as if it was wrong. My wife told
him we do not compare our children and let them have their own identities.
Furthermore, I like my children to have a strong character as I believe
that a Filipino’s concept of subservience is misplaced
Lastly, I would like to inform you of some technicalities regarding the
issue(d) [and the] PTC [given that we find to be irregular for future disposal
of the same. These are:
1. The element of time has been too long. Besides, the information did not carry any particulars as to time and place the incident took place.
2. The signature of Mr. _______ did not carry his name.
3. The PTC was issued by the adviser who was not even a party to the
incident. This matters as it may be construed that the incident happened
inside the classroom. What should have been done was for Mr. Laqui to sign
the issuance and left the “noted by” blank.
With these explanations, I hope you understand our dilemma to reconcile Mr.
_______'s decision with our own assessment of the situation. Incidentally, I
was surprised at the turn of events because I would have asked the children
to settle their differences by themselves and end up being friends. None
of this happened which made my daughter tell me that they have seen the
complainant after the incident with a sneer on her face. Now, I ignored
that remark but come to think about it, it’s most likely to happen given
the situation, don’t you think? None of this would have happened had the
situation was given a win-win proposal such as them ending up as friends.
After all, we all live in one single community founded on love and
Thank you very much for your valued time.
Rolly delos Santos