Every lie we tell incurs a debt to the truth. Sooner or later, that debt is paid.
Valery Legasov
By Dr. Bob Uttl
On November 23, 2009, Mr. William (“Bill”) Gook wrote to Ms. T advising that Mr. Glenn Dobie, Director of Instruction for School District No. 5, would investigate 16 non-specific, undated allegations made by unknown individual(s) regarding Ms. T’s teaching (the “Mr. Gook November 23, 2009 Letter”). A copy of that letter is available here, with most allegations redacted for privacy: Mr. Gook’s November 23, 2009 letter to Ms. T.
On December 16, 2009, Mr. Dobie completed and signed a report outlining his investigation (the “December 16, 2009 Investigation Report”). In the report, Mr. Dobie addressed each of the 16 allegations, briefly summarizing his findings and conclusions. A copy of the report is available here, with most allegations and conclusions redacted for privacy: Mr. Dobie’s December 16, 2009 Investigation Report to Mr. Gook.
Notably, Mr. Dobie found no evidence to support the most serious allegations, including allegations of insubordination, and concluded that the alleged events did not occur.
Despite this, or perhaps because of it, Ms. Cynthia Stuart, Director of Human Resources, School District No. 5, did not provide Mr. Dobie’s December 16, 2009, Investigation Report to Ms. T or to the Union, despite repeated requests. Instead, Ms. Stuart and School District 5 claimed, falsely, that Mr. Dobie’s investigation had not been concluded and that no investigation report existed.
Yet, in May 2010, Ms. Cynthia Stuart herself secretly provided Mr. Dobie’s December 16, 2009, Investigation Report to Dr. Todd Kettner without the knowledge or consent of Ms. T or the Union. Dr. Todd Kettner subsequently listed the report among the materials he reviewed in his June 2010 report on Ms. T, summarized the allegations in his report, but did not disclose that Mr. Dobie himself found the most serious allegations unfounded, supported by “no evidence.” Dr. Todd Kettner admitted to this failure in his own testimony under oath. However, when the Union requested Mr. Dobie’s report, Ms. Stuart did not produce it and repeatedly denied its existence. She put up smoke and mirrors and asserted, for example, that Mr. Dobie’s report “mirrors exactly” Mr. Gook’s November 23, 2009, letter and suggested that the Union was misidentifying the documents.
Ms. T subsequently retained legal counsel and sought access to Mr. Dobie’s December 16, 2009, Investigation Report and related records under the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. In response, School District No. 5, represented by Ms. Frances C. Doyle from Harris & Company, disclosed an unsigned version of the report, while maintaining that no other, no signed versions, existed and that Mr. Dobie did not conclude his investigation.
Years later, once the litigation started, on July 12, 2017, Ms. Cynthia Stuart swore an affidavit in which she disclosed, for the first time, the existence of the signed December 16, 2009 Investigation Report by Mr. Dobie, and attached the copy of Dobie’s December 16, 2009 Investigation Report to her affidavit.
On April 15, 2024, during cross-examination under oath, Ms. Cynthia Stuart confirmed that the signed report had in fact been issued by Mr. Dobie on December 16, 2009. And after some resistance, Ms. Stuart acknowledged that the report does not “mirror exactly” Mr. Gook’s November 23, 2009, letter, and that the two documents had different intents and different messages: Mr. Gook’s letter outlines the allegations to be investigated, whereas Mr. Dobie’s report sets out the results of that investigation.
What follows are the key details of this 15-year-long saga of Ms. Cythia Stuart and School District No. 5 denials, misrepresentations, and gaslighting about Mr. Dobie’s December 16, 2009, Investigation Report.
Dr. Todd Kettner Disclosure of Existence of Mr. Dobie’s December 16, 2016 Investigation Letter to Mr. Gook
On June 14, 2010, Dr. Todd Kettner issued his 5-page report on the assessment of Ms. T. On page 2, Dr. Kettner listed seven documents that he reviewed, including two documents described by Dr. Kettner as (1) “November 23, 2009 Letter of Investigation from Mr. Gook to Ms. T” and (2) “December 16, 2009 Result of Investigation from Mr. Dobie to Mr. Gook”.
From Dr. Kettner’s June 2010 Report, Ms. T and the Union learned for the first time that Mr. Glenn Dobie produced the results of his investigations back in December 16, 2009, the investigation initiated by Mr. Gook’s November 23, 2009 letter, and that the School District No. 5 obviously shared the report, secretly, without Ms. T’s consent and knowledge, with Dr. Todd Kettner.
Ms. Cynthia Stuart Repeatedly Lied to the Union About Mr. Dobie’s December 16, 2016, Investigation Letter to Mr. Gook
On May 4, 2011, @ 2:44PM, the Union emailed Ms. Cynthia Stuart and requested “December 15, 2009 Results of Investigation from Mr. Dobie to Mr. Gook”:
Hello, Cynthia.
I have received a package of materials that are being forwarded to Dr. Suffield. Thank you. I have requested a copy of the December 16, 2009 result of investigation from Mr. Dobie to Mr. Gook as it was forwarded to Dr. Kettner in the first assessment. May we please receive a copy of this document as soon as possible?
Sincerely,
Wendy.
Email from Wendy Turner to Cynthia Stuart, dated May 4, 2011
On May 4, 2011, @ 4:36 PM, Ms. Cynthia Stuart replied that she would look into this right away:
I will look into this right away.
cynthia
Email from Cynthia Stuart to Wendy Turner, dated May 4, 2011
On May 5, 2011, @ 2:48 PM, the Union again requested December 16, 2009 results of investigation from Mr. Dobie to Mr. Gook:
Hello Cynthia,
… I’m also waiting for a response on receiving a copy of Glenn Dobie’s Investigation report to Bill re: Ms. T.
Thank you,
Wendy
Email from Wendy Turner to Cynthia Stuart, dated May 5, 2011
On May 5, 2011, Ms. Cynthia Stuart replied to the Union’s request as follows:
Hi again.
…
I need to ensure that the confidential letter from Glenn to Bill was included in the original package. This is not normally released to anyone – you would however, have been a union representative during the follow up conversation or have received copies of letters that went to Ms. T from BG [Bill Gook] as a result of concluding the investigation.
Thanks Wendy.
cynthia
Email from Cynthia Stuart to Wendy Turner, dated May 5, 2011
On May 12, 2011, the Union continued to seek Mr. Dobie’s December 16, 2009 investigation results letter to Mr. Gook and advanced the issue to Step Three of the Grievance process:
Dear Ms. Stuart,
Re: Grievance #2011.10
…
The Union asserts in this grievance that the Board has not produced a copy of the December 16, 2009 Result of Investigation from Mr. Dobie to Mr. Gook which the Association has made requests for from the Human Resource Director Ms. Cynthia Stuart. This report has been included in a neuropscyhological assessment in a process which may lead to the dismissal of a member.
…
Yours truly,
CRANBROOK AND FERNIE TEACHER’S ASSOCIATION
Wendy Turner [&] Cindy Gleb
cc: Carol Tirk, BCTF
Bill Gook, Superintendent of Schools/CEO SD5
Brian Chutter, BCPSEA
Letter from the Union to Cynthia Stuart, dated May 12, 2011
On June 6, 2011, the Union continued attempts to obtain Mr. Dobie’s December 16, 2009 letter:
Dear Ms. Stuart
Re: Grievance #2011.10
…
The Union asserts in this grievance that the Board has not produced a copy of the December 16, 2009 Result of Investigation from Mr. Dobie to Mr. Gook which the Association has made requests for from the Human Resource Director Ms. Cynthia Stuart. This report has been included in a neuropscyhological assessment in a process which may lead to the dismissal of a member.
…
Yours truly,
CRANBROOK AND FERNIE TEACHER’S ASSOCIATION
Wendy Turner [&] Cindy Gleb
cc: Carol Tirk, BCTF
Bill Gook, Superintentend of Schools/CEO SD5
Brian Chutter, BCPSEA
Letter from the Union to Cynthia Stuart, dated June 6, 2011
On June 21, 2011, Ms. Cynthia Stuart and Ms. Wendy Turner met regarding Grievance 2011.10. According to Ms. Stuart’s authenticated handwritten notes, Grievance 2011.10 was moved to Step 3.
On June 27, 2011, Ms. Cynthia Stuart wrote a rather astonishing response to the Union seeking Dobie’s December 16, 2009 letter:
RE: Grievance 2011.10 – Results of Investigations
Dear Cindy and Wendy,
I spent some time reviewing Ms. T’s file and other correspondence and did not discover that we sent a letter from Mr. Dobie to Mr. Gook dated December 16, 2009 that you claim was sent “… to be included in a neuropsychological assessment…”.
I have attached three letters dated November 23, 2009, January 7, 2010 and March 29, 2010 which we wonder may be the letters you are referring to.
Any confidential letters between the investigator and the Superintendent that reference an investigation are not released to anyone. Mr. Gook would then have then been in touch with you to explain the resulting actions and decisions.
I would submit, there is no merit to this grievance and it therefore be withdrawn.
Yours Truly,
Cynthia Stuart
Director of Instruction/Human Resources
Cc: Doug McPhee, Director of Instruction/Health and Safety
Brian Chutter, BCPSEA
Letter from Cynthia Stuart to the Union, dated June 27, 2011
Ms. Stuart attached
- November 23, 2009 Letter from Mr. Gook to Ms. T notifying Ms. T of investigation of 16 allegations against her,
- January 7, 2010 Letter from Mr. Gook to Ms. T notifying Ms. T that “Mr. Dobie has completed his investigation”.
- March 29, 2010 Letter from Mr. Gook to Ms. T notifying her that Mr. Dobie’s investigation “is ongoing”
Most obviously none of these three letters were (a) dated December 16, 2009, (b) from Mr. Dobie to Mr. Gook, and (c) “results of investigation” by Mr. Dobie. Apparently, Ms. Cynthia Stuart was either unable to grasp these elementary facts or was outright lying to the Union, presumably hoping that the Union representatives were illiterate and could not grasp these elementary facts themselves.
On Jun 28, 2011, Ms. Cynthia Stuart met with at least Ms. Wendy Turner. According to Ms. Stuart’s handwritten notes, Ms. Stuart claimed that the Union has “the entire package [of documents] already,” but Ms. Wendy Turner stated that she had “no reports from Glenn Dobie.”
On June 30, 2011, Ms. T reviewed her personnel file, accompanied by Ms. Wendy Turner, and, according to Ms. Stuart’s handwritten notes, requested copies of two unrelated documents. Mr. Dobie’s December 16, 2009, letter to Mr. Gook was not in the personnel file, and was not in the personnel file a decade later when the School District No. 5 produced the personnel file as part of the disclosure in ongoing litigation.
On July 14, 2011, Ms. Cynthia wrote yet another astonishing response to the Union seeking Dobie’s December 16, 2009, letter:
RE Grievance 2011.10 – Investigation
Dear Cindy and Wendy,
Further to my letter June 27 2011 (with accompanying letters), I did some more research on the letter in question. You had requested a copy of a letter from Mr. Dobie to Mr. Gook dated December 16 2009 that was included in a package sent to one of the Doctor’s [Dr. Todd Kettner] on behalf of Ms. T.
I am not sure how this letter would have been included in the package — but it was obviously referred to. In keeping with our trust factor around all written materials, I was able to locate the letter in question. This took some searching as it is not in a file accessible to me. The letter is confidential and is not to be copied, but I wish to reassure you of the contents. The letter mirrors exactly the letter Mr. Gook sent to Ms. T dated November 23, 2009, which I have attached. Each bullet follows verbatim the letter written by Mr. Dobie.
I will need to request your trust with this response. The letter in question is not to be copied, nor do I have, nor will I receive permission for it to be copied. The investigation points listed in the letter to Ms. T continue to remain in abeyance.
Thank you for your understanding around this.
I find no evidence to support that any Articles of our Collective Agreement have been breached.
I trust this is now resolved.
Yours truly,
Cynthia Stuart
Director of Instruction/Human Resources
Cc: Bill Gook, Superintendent
Doug McPhee, Director of Health and Safety
Brian Chutter, BCPSEA
Kate Noakes, CFTA Co-Chair September 2011
Letter from Cynthia Stuart to the Union, dated July 14, 2011
Thus, Ms. Stuart finally located Mr. Dobie’s December 16, 2009, letter to Mr. Gook and claimed that “The letter mirrors exactly the letter Mr. Gook sent to Ms. T dated November 23, 2009”. Ms. Stuart’s statement that Mr. Dobie’s letter to Mr. Gook “mirrors exactly the letter Mr. Gook sent to Ms. T” was a bald-faced lie. A decade later, under cross-examination and under oath, Ms. Stuart, after putting up some intermittent resistance, admitted that Mr. Dobie’s December 16, 2009, letter did not mirror exactly Mr. Gook’s letter to Ms. T (see below), that Mr. Gook’s letter to Ms. T only had allegations, whereas Mr. Dobie’s letter to Mr. Gook had Mr. Dobie’s investigation results.
On September 16, 2011, the Union wrote to Ms. Stuart in response to her attempts at gaslighting the Union about Mr. Dobie’s December 16, 2009, letter to Mr. Gook:
Dear Ms. Stuart,
Re: Grievance #1011.10
The Cranbrook and Fernie Teachers Association, CFTA, has received your written response to our request for a copy of Glenn Dobie’s summary report/letter of investigation that was sent to Dr. Kettner.
We are unable to accept the letter you have given us dated November 23, 2009 as it is the original letter of investigation, which notified Ms. T of the beginning of the process. It in no way reflects a summary or conclusion of the investigation and was not written by Mr. Dobie.
The CFTA requests once more a copy of MR. Dobie’s summary letter/report of investigation to the Superintendent that was sent to Dr. Kettner as part of her first psychological assessment. We ask that it be forwarded to us by September 23, 2011.
Yours truly.
CRANBROOK AND FERNIE TEACHERS ASSOCIATION
Wendy Turner, CDTA President
Kate Noakes, FDTA President
cc: Susan Fonseca, BCTF
Bill Gook, Superintendent of Schools/CEO SD5
Brian Chutter, BCPSEA
Letter from the Union to Cynthia Stuart, dated September 16, 2011
Thus, contrary to Ms. Stuart’s expectation, the Union understood that a letter dated November 23, 2009, is not dated December 16, 2009, that the letter from Mr. Gook to Ms. T is not a letter from Mr. Dobie to Mr. Gook, and that Mr. Gook’s November 23, 2009 letter merely laid out allegations and did not include Mr. Dobie’s investigation results and conclusions.
Mr. Bill Gook, Superintendent, clearly copied on the relevant correspondence, did nothing and allowed—or possibly directed—his Director of Human Resources, Ms. Stuart, to continue the lying charade. Clearly, Ms. Stuart stonewalled the Union, did not provide Mr. Dobie’s December 16, 2009 letter, and deliberately lied about Mr. Dobie’s December 16, 2009 letter to Mr. Gook.
Ms. Stuart also lied when she wrote that she “did not discover that we sent a letter from Mr. Dobie to Mr. Gook dated December 16, 2009, that you claim was sent.” Ms. Stuart herself secretly sent a letter from Mr. Dobie to Mr. Gook dated December 16, 2009, to Dr. Todd Kettner and left a trail of emails and her own handwritten notes of doing so, swore years later that she did it, and Dr. Todd Kettner wrote a contemporaneous email that he received it and testified a decade later that he did receive it.
School District No. 5 Lied In Response to the FOIPPA Request
Given the Union’s failure to extract Mr. Dobie’s December 16, 2009, letter from the School District No. 5 and Ms. Stuart’s persistent stonewalling, lying, and gaslighting, Ms. T hired a lawyer, and her lawyer proceeded to request all documents related to Mr. Dobie’s investigation, including the December 16, 2009, letter. The letter from Ms. T’s counsel, dated September 16, 2011, and addressed to Rob Norum, Secretary Treasurer, School District No. 5 Southeast Kootenay, stated in part:
On behalf of Ms. T, we hereby request that you provide all documents related to the investigation conducted by Mr. Glenn Dobie. To ensure there is no confusion as to the documents we are seeking, we have attached a letter from Bill Gook dated January 7, 2010 in which Mr. Gook explains that Mr. Dobie’s investigation has been completed. It is the investigation that is the subject of Mr. Gook’s letter which we are seeking documents in relation to.
We seek all written records relating to Mr. Dobie’s investigation. This includes documents drafted, and considered by, Mr. Dobie in the course of the investigation. We also seek documents drafted in response to Mr. Dobie’s findings, including and written records of decisions which were made, or actions which were taken, as a result of Mr. Dobie’s investigation.
Ms. T’s Counsel’s Letter to SD5, dated September 16, 2011
In response to the request, the School District No. 5, represented by Frances C. Doyle from Harris and Company, provided Mr. Dobie’s December 16, 2009, letter to Mr. Gook, not signed, and wrote falsely, “Whether Mr. Dobie’s investigation will be concluded, … must await the parties’ receipt and consideration of the independent medical evaluation.” Ms. Frances Doyle wrote:
Dear Sirs and Mesdames:
RE: Ms. T — Request for Personal Information
We confirm we act for the Board of Education, School District No. 5 (Southeast Kootenay) in the above matter. We write in response to your letter of September 16, 2011 regarding Ms. T’s request for access to information under Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.
We have enclosed records responsive to your request….
… Whether Mr. Dobie’s investigation will be concluded [emphasis added], and whether any decisions will be made as a result of his investigation, must await the parties’ receipt and consideration of the independent medical evaluation.
…
Yours very truly,
Harris & Company LLP
Per: Frances C. Doyle
Enclosures
cc client
Letter from Frances C. Doyle, dated October 31, 2011
The “responsive” records enclosed with Ms. Frances C. Doyle’s letter included Mr. Dobie’s December 16, 2009, letter to Mr. Gook, unsigned.
However, at the time, the School District No. 5 had in its possession many responsive documents, including the following:
- Mr. Dobie’s December 14, 2009, letter to Mr. Gook, signed (and with Mr. Bill Gook’s handwritten comments over it) (denied/not disclosed)
- Mr. Dobie’s December 16, 2009, letter to Mr. Gook, unsigned (disclosed)
- Mr. Dobie’s December 16, 2009, letter to Mr. Gook, signed (denied/not disclosed)
Thus, the School District No. 5 falsely denied the existence of both Mr. Dobie’s December 14, 2009, letter to Mr. Gook, signed, as well as Mr. Dobie’s December 16, 2009, letter to Mr. Gook, signed, and pretended that Mr. Dobie’s investigation was not yet concluded (and not signed). The two non-disclosed letters were disclosed only nearly a decade later as part of the disclosure in the ongoing legal proceedings.
As to who was responsible for the non-disclosure/lying in response to the FOIPPA request, there are several possibilities: (a) SD5 administrators lied to their lawyer, Ms. Frances C. Doyle, and Ms. Doyle presented the SD5 lies believing them to be true, (b) SD5 lawyer Ms. Frances C. Doyle chose to lie to Ms. T’s lawyer on behalf of the SD5 and on her own initiative, and (c) SD5 administrators and Ms. Frances C. Doyle chose to lie, collectively as a team, to Ms. T’s lawyer and to suppress Mr. Dobie’s other signed reports. Finally, it is also possible that SD5 administrators, including Ms. Cynthia Stuart who was responsible for personnel files and operation of School District No. 5 Human Resources Department, were stunningly incompetent, and as the result of their stunning incompetence, had no memory of Dobie’s December 16, 2009 Investigation Report, had insufficient mental capacity to search for the requested documents, and/or truly believed that those records in their possession and control did not exist.
In any case, Ms. Frances C. Doyle represented the SD5 and the SD5 lied to Ms. T’s lawyer and did not disclose Mr. Dobie’s December 14, 2009 letter to Mr. Gook, signed, nor Mr. Dobie’s December 16, 2009 letter to Mr. Gook, signed.
Ms. Cythia Stuart’s Admissions Under Oath
In July 2017, School District No. 5 for the first time disclosed a December 16, 2009, letter from Mr. Dobie to Mr. Gook, signed, and admitted that indeed Mr. Dobie completed and signed his investigation report back in December 2009.
On July 12, 2017, Ms. Cynthia Stuart swore an affidavit in which she (a) testified that the November 23, 2009, letter from Mr. Gook to Ms. T “advised” Ms. T “that an investigation was to be commenced”, and (b) the December 16, 2009, letter from Mr. Dobie to Mr. Gook was an “investigation report.”
Thus, Ms. Cynthia Stuart was, at least under oath and penalty of perjury, able to comprehend English and able to see that the November 23, 2009, Letter from Mr. Gook to Ms. T advised Ms. T of investigations and allegations, whereas the December 16, 2009, letter from Mr. Dobie to Mr. Gook was the investigation report that contained the results of Mr. Dobie’s investigation.
Ms. Cynthia Stuart’s Resistance, Comprehension Difficulties, and Answers Under Cross-Examination
On April 15, 2024, Ms. Stuart was cross-examined on Mr. Gook’s November 23, 2009, letter to Ms. T, on Mr. Dobie’s December 16, 2009, letter to Mr. Gook, her understanding as to whether one letter mirrored the other “exactly” or not, and related matters. The cross-examination reveals that Ms. Stuart continued to have rather stunning difficulties comprehending the content, intent, and message of each of the two letters, but was able to determine at the end that the two letters had different intent, different content, different message, and did not mirror each other, contrary to her prior false statements, including the false statements to the Union.
Ms. Cynthia Stuart’s letter to the Union, dated July 14, 2011, was placed in front of Ms. Stuart:
QUESTION: So here you say that you located the letter. Actually, first of all, did you do you recognize this as something you wrote to Cindy [the Union]?
CYNTHIA STUART: I recognize my signature, yes.
QUESTION: And so you are saying you located it, and you said it’s confidential, and you said that it mirrors exactly the letter Mr. Gook sent to Ms. T dated November 23, 2009, correct?
CYNTHIA STUART: That’s what it says.
QUESTION: And that’s not true, correct?
CYNTHIA STUART: Pardon me?
QUESTION: And that statement is not true, correct?
CYNTHIA STUART: Why is it not true?
QUESTION: Well, because the letter of Mr. Dobie to Mr. Gook dated December 16, 2009, does not mirror exactly the letter Mr. Gook sent to Ms. T dated November 23, 2009.
CYNTHIA STUART: I have nothing to answer that with. I have nothing to show or compare, so I can’t answer that.
Cross-examination of Cynthia Stuart
Mr. Gook’s letter to Ms. T, dated November 23, 2009, was placed in front of Ms. Stuart:
QUESTION: Okay. Let’s scroll down. The next three pages, so this will be 680, 81, and 82. You have already testified about this letter. This is a November 23, 2009 letter from Mr. Gook to Ms. T, and it is a letter of investigation which gives the 16 allegations to be investigated. If you can scroll down, you can even read it if you like.
CYNTHIA STUART: Can you tell me the date of that letter again, please? December?
QUESTION: November 23, 2009.
CYNTHIA STUART: Oh, sorry. Thank you. 2009. Thank you.
QUESTION: So yes, until you are finished, I will wait.
CYNTHIA STUART: Thank you. Many points. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Thank you.
QUESTION: And so would you agree with me that this is November 23, 2009 letter from Mr. Gook to Ms. T and that it only lists the allegations. It does not have Mr. Dobie’s findings correct
CYNTHIA STUART: That is correct it is the instigation of yeah
Cross-examination of Cynthia Stuart
Ms. Stuart agreed Mr. Gook’s letter to Ms. T only lists the allegations, and does not have Mr. Dobie’s findings.
Next, Mr. Dobie’s letter to Mr. Gook, dated December 16, 2009, was placed in front of Ms. Stuart:
QUESTION: Okay now if you can go to RBD respondents book of document 177 please
QUESTION: And this and again you can read through it is the actual letter from Mr. Dobie to Mr. Gook stating his investigation dated December 16 2009 that is the letter which the Ms. T and the union have been seeking at that time. You can scroll through it but you see.
CYNTHIA STUART: I also see that it’s stamped with the draft on the front of it too so probably is not. Is it draft?
QUESTION: It is not stamped with draft, it’s stamped with confidential.
SD5 COUNSEL: It is confidential
CYNTHIA STUART: Thank you. I can see it on the second page, thank you. Could not on the first page. That is from Mr. Dobie to Mr. Gook.
QUESTION: Yes, that’s the letter which union was seeking, December 16, 2009. Scroll through it just to make sure you got it right.
CYNTHIA STUART: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
QUESTION: And so this is the Dobie December 16, 2009 results of investigation report which you testified about previously, correct?
CYNTHIA STUART: Yes.
QUESTION: And this letter includes the allegation and it also includes Mr. Dobie’s findings, correct?
CYNTHIA STUART: Absolutely.
Cross-examination of Cynthia Stuart
Ms. Stuart agreed that Mr. Dobie’s December 16, 2009 letter to Mr. Gook includes Mr. Dobie’s findings, the results of his investigation.
Next, Ms. Stuart letter to the Union, dated July 14, 2011, was again placed in front of Ms. Stuart:
QUESTION: And so now if you can go back to CB 11 679. And so now your statement, the letter, this is the end of the first paragraph, the letter mirrors exactly the letter Mr. Gook sent to Ms. T dated November 23, 2009, which I have attached, is not true, correct?
CYNTHIA STUART: Is not. What is not verbatim?
QUESTION: Yeh, is not true. One letter has the results and the other one doesn’t. And one is from Mr. Gook to Ms. T, and one is from Mr. Dobie to Mr. Gook.
CYNTHIA STUART: Okay.
QUESTION: Do you agree?
CYNTHIA STUART: Not entirely.
QUESTION: In your view, it is accurate to describe Mr. Dobie’s December 16, 2009 letter as mirroring exactly what Mr. Gook sent to Ms. T dated November 23, 2009?
CYNTHIA STUART: It would mirror intent, for sure.
QUESTION: How could it mirror intent, given that Dobie’s letter has findings, whereas Gook’s letter to T doesn’t have findings?
CYNTHIA STUART: I don’t know how to answer that.
QUESTION: Well, something which mirrors something is exactly the same. In fact, you say verbatim the letter written by Mr. Dobie.
CYNTHIA STUART: Yeh.
QUESTION: And you failed to mention that while the bullets are mirrored, the rest of it is not. Would you agree with me that you misled the Union?
CYNTHIA STUART: I wouldn’t say I misled them. I would say the intent is the same.
QUESTION: And what was the intent of each letter?
CYNTHIA STUART: The message was the same.
QUESTION: And what was the message of each letter?
CYNTHIA STUART: I need to see them in front of me again, please.
Cross-examination of Cynthia Stuart
Surprisingly, Ms. Stuart resisted, disagreed, and claimed (under oath) that the two letters “mirror intent, for sure” and “The message [of the two letters] was the same”.
Next, Mr. Gook November 23, 2009 Letter to Ms. T was placed again in front of Ms. Stuart and she was questioned as to the intent of the letter:
QUESTION: Okay, if you can scroll down to 680. And take your time. Tell me what is the intent of this November 23, 2009 letter to Ms. T from Mr. Gook?
CYNTHIA STUART: To let her know that the district is going to be conducting an investigation.
QUESTION: Okay.
CYNTHIA STUART: And. And all the bullet points that follow would be the items that would be investigated.
QUESTION: Okay. And it is your understanding that this letter also communicates the results of Dobie’s investigation to Ms. T?
CYNTHIA STUART: Um, at this point?
QUESTION: Well, this letter. This letter, November 23, 2009. Does it communicate the results of the investigations?
CYNTHIA STUART: Can I see the next little bit of the letter, please? Yes, it would pull out the points. Yes.
QUESTION: So could you point me to a results of the investigation in this letter? Because I don’t see it.
CYNTHIA STUART: This is a letter of investigation. That is to set out an investigation.
QUESTION: And to set out allegations, as you testified previously, correct?
CYNTHIA STUART: That’s correct.
QUESTION: But it does not intend, and it does not do it, it does not provide the results of Mr. Dobie’s investigation, correct? Mr. Dobie has not started to investigate yet.
CYNTHIA STUART: Looking at dates here again.
QUESTION: November 23, 2009.
CYNTHIA STUART: Yes, that’s right, that’s correct, yeah.
Cross-examination of Cynthia Stuart
Ms. Stuart agreed that Mr. Gook’s November 23, 2009 letters does not intent, does not do it, and does not provide the results of Mr. Dobie’s investigation.
Next, Mr. Dobie’s December 16, 2009 letter to Mr. Gook was again placed in front of Ms. Stuart:
QUESTION: Okay, and now if you can go to RBD, RBD 177 page, please.
QUESTION: And this is the December 16, 2009 letter from Mr. Dobie to Mr. Gook. And the clear intent of that letter, and that’s what the letter does, it informs Mr. Gook of the results of Mr. Dobie’s findings and conclusions, correct?
CYNTHIA STUART: That’s correct.
QUESTION: And so the intents of the two letters are different, correct?
CYNTHIA STUART: One is to conduct an investigation, and the second is the results of the investigation.
QUESTION: Thank you.
Cross-examination of Cynthia Stuart
Ms. Stuart finally agreed that the intent of the two letters is different, something which a Grade 5 student is able to determine in a few minutes.
Conclusions
The documentary record establishes that Mr. Glenn Dobie issued his December 16, 2009 Investigation Report on that date; that Ms. Cynthia Stuart had the report in her possession and secretly shared it with others, including Dr. Todd Kettner; that she repeatedly denied the report’s existence; and that, when she later acknowledged the report’s existence, her prior statements—including the assertion that it ‘mirrored exactly’ Mr. Gook’s November 23, 2009 letter—were contradicted by the documentary record and by her own testimony under oath.