In December 2008, Jenifer Dennis couldn’t believe that her family’s battle had been dragging on for a year. At the time, she’d expected it to be resolved by Christmas. Now another Christmas has passed and the case that began when her son came home from school with the mark of a cross burned into his arm seems no closer to a resolution.
Meanwhile, the Mount Vernon School District is a divided community in this rural section of south-central Ohio. And John Freshwater, the 8th-grade science teacher who admitted to using an electrostatic device known as a Tesla coil on Zachary Dennis’ arm, remains a polarizing figure at the center of the fray.
Despite the case’s layered subtexts much of the debate is over evolution.
Interestingly, one of the reasons for the divisiveness is that there appears to be no established version of events between the two sides. Depending on whom you talk to, this is either about a student being branded... or it’s about a Bible on a desk.
The story began in December 2007, after Zachary came home with a burn mark on his arm. Jenifer Dennis and her husband Steve complained to the school district after Zachary told them that Freshwater had asked him to volunteer to be part of a science experiment. The Dennises said the burn, which in photos [above, right] show an 8-by-4-inch mark on their son’s forearm, raised blisters, kept their son awake that night, and lasted for several weeks.
At first glance, they saw the mark as a religious emblem. But their first concern was less about religion and more about what they considered to be a case of a teacher injuring their son.
In response, the Dennises filed a federal lawsuit against Freshwater and the Mount Vernon School District, which is still three months away. However, in August, the school district, which had been named in the suit, settled with the family.
After the Dennises complained to the district, the school launched a lengthy independent investigation in which Freshwater, other teachers, students, and administrators were all interviewed. The consultant concluded in a report that Freshwater had been teaching students that evolution is a lie for at least 11 years.
The report said that Freshwater had witnessed to students, at one point telling them that there couldn’t possibly be a genetic link to homosexuality because the Bible says it is a sin. The report also said that he handed out Bibles to members of the Fellowship of Christian Athletes and led them in prayers during school hours.
It also said Freshwater had misused the Tesla coil during the science experiment.
Citing the findings, the district tried to fire Freshwater in July 2008. Alleging religious persecution, Freshwater fought back, filing a request with the Ohio Board of Education for a pre-termination hearing. Due to lengthy ongoing delays by Freshwater’s attorney, the teacher has not yet finished presenting his case before the state-appointed referee. The hearing has continued for more than a year and has cost the district more than a half million dollars.
He remains suspended without pay.
Brand v. Bible
Attacks against the teaching of evolution are not uncommon in small towns across America. But the grisly accusations and the extremism of some of Freshwater’s supporters have recently caught the attention of both the New York Times and the Guardian UK, both of which sent reporters to Mount Vernon recently. The Times piece highlighted the divide in the school district, which is flanked by two liberal arts schools, Kenyon College and Mount Vernon Nazarene University.
One of Freshwater’s move vocal supporters, Dave Daubenmire, is the creator of the town’s Minute Men United, a militant organization that endorses Christian theocracy. Two years ago, according to the Columbus Dispatch, Minutemen led protests at religious services of two local churches that embraced the gay community. Until the branding incident, Freshwater had been an active participant at Minutemen anti-abortion events.
Daubenmire has characterized the Freshwater case as a war and has accused the district superintendent Steve Short of doing the devil‘s bidding.
In a recent interview, Daubenmire said there has been a lot of misinformation in the news media about the case. “Everything you read is not true,” he told me. His primary objection to the New York Times article was that it said Freshwater admitted to burning Zachary Dennis.
The Times wrote:
Mr. Freshwater, who declined to be interviewed, has said he did not mean to burn a cross on any student’s arm. Instead, he said he intended to leave a temporary X on the skin using a device called a Tesla coil during a science demonstration. He says he had done that, with no complaints, hundreds of times in his 21 years as a teacher at Mount Vernon Middle School.
Daubenmire said that Freshwater had admitted using the Tesla coil on Zachary Dennis, as he has done to students for 20 years, but he denies that he burned him. “There is no proof that is his arm in the photo,” he said.
However, during the school district hearing last year, a mole on the arm in the photo was shown to match up to the mole on Zachary’s arm. Also, other students testified for both the defense and on behalf of the school district that Freshwater had put similar marks on their arms.
When I spoke to Freshwater a year ago for an article I wrote for RD, he also said he had used the Tesla coil on Zachary, but said he didn’t know whether it had left a mark at the time.
Still, Daubenmire maintains that Freshwater did not burn Zachary.
“That is not the arm of Zachary Dennis, or if it is, it was not a mark left by John Freshwater,” Daubenmire said.
Tags: chid abuse, creationism, darwin, education, establishment clause, evolution, intelligent design, john freshwater, tesla coil
When students begin their study of the Third Reich, one of the first, most palpable and lingering questions they have is "How could the good, ordinary citizens of Germany have been caught up in this mass insanity."
It is really a relevant question in America today.
There are people who would like to replace the swastika with Jesus' cross.
The lucky thing is that even Christianity is divided among the traditional sects, the various Big-Box Churches, and the televangelist huckster followers. There's no one hypnotic charismatic leader who can unify them all.
Responsible adult Christians, and non-believers are going to have to lock arms and protect our country against this mass-hysteria threat.
That's the bottom line.
I'm not locking arms with any religious person, especially any christians. Their doctrine clearly states, if they were to deceive, steal, stab someone in the back, even shoot a person in the head that's praying in a church, then ask in the name of Jesus for forgiveness, they will be forgiven. Then they'll pass the basket, ca-ching $$.
The US is a country that calls itself righteous and free but why does things like these, lesser and worse, seem commonplace.
Deborah
author - dog allergies blog
coverage by Dick Hoppe of the Panda's Thumb blog who has witnessed most of the arbitration proceedings between Freshwater and the Mt. Vernon School Board can be read here.
If I didn't live in a predominantly Christian rural town I would probably shake my head in wonder. However, and unfortunate for me and my children, I do not live in supposedly free America. Where I live Osama Bin Laden wears a white collar so I just keep my Darwinian ideas to myself.
Lauri Lebo,
As you pointed out in your article, Freshwater denies burning any students.
Lauri Lebo said: “Freshwater, fearing disciplinary action, took his side of the story public. But he never mentioned the branding incident.”
There is a very good reason why he didn’t mention the “branding” allegation—it wasn’t an issue. The letter that the school gave him that had the April 16, 2008 deadline to deal with the Bible and other items in his classroom did not mention the burn allegation. (I have a copy of the letter posted on my website; see the article “Bring Your Bible to School Day.” )
A Mount Vernon News article on April 17, 2008 “Crowd shows support for MV science teacher” states the following: “In a formal press release, Superintendent Steve Short said, ‘The Mount Vernon Schools today directed one of its middle school science teachers to remove from his classroom the Ten Commandments he had displayed and to remove his Bible from his desktop while students were in his room. The Mount Vernon Schools has not taken this action because it opposes religion, but because it has an obligation under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution to protect against the establishment of religion in the schools. As a public school system, the district cannot teach, promote or favor any religion or religious beliefs.’”
There was NO mention of the burn or branding allegation.
The allegation of the burn was an issue that was officially resolved by the school in January 2008. It only became an issue again after Freshwater said he was going to keep the Bible on his desk. (See my article "Tesla Coil Matter Was Officially Resolved January 2008." )
This discussion of a burning has been thoroughly discussed in the termination hearing. So it is obviously an issue. Do you have a copy of a letter to the family who went to the administration about this? Was it a resolved issue to them?
Here is a great link for more information:
http://pandasthumb.org/
(just search John Freshwater)
To MountVernon1805:
Here is the timeline in the investigation report:
12/10/07: A meeting was held with Mr. Freshwater and Principal Bill White regarding the use
of the electrostatic device on students
1/22/08: Mr. Freshwater received a letter from Mr. White regarding discontinuing the use of
the electrical device. (Copy as Attachment 18)
4/7/08: Mr. Freshwater received a letter from Mr. White regarding his FCA activities and
religious materials in his classroom (Copy as Attachment 19)
4/9/08: Mr. White and Mr. Short met with Mr. Freshwater to review the letter given to him
on 4/7/08
4/11/08: Mr. White met with Mr. Freshwater regarding the removal of religious items from his
classroom.
4/14/08: Mr. Freshwater received a letter from Mr. White advising him that all religious items
need to be removed from his classroom by the end of the day on Wednesday, April
16, 2008. (Copy as Attachment 20)
4/15/08: Mr. Freshwater checked out a Bible and a book titled, “Jesus of Nazareth from the
school library
4/16/08: Mr. Freshwater issued a statement saying in part, “In addition, my superiors have
ordered me to remove the Bible from the desk of my classroom.” It ends with, “I do
not forfeit my right to free expression of my faith when I walk into the school and
because I strongly object to the ‘Christian censorship’ being promoted in our schools
I respectfully reject the request to remove the Bible.”
As you can see, the burn mark had already been an issue before the subject of the Bible on the desk and it was one of the first things that had been addressed by the district. It was not something brought up later after Mr. Freshwater's press conference.
Here is a link to the full report: http://tiny.cc/bngrw
As stated in my comment, the burn allegation was not an issue at the time that Freshwater made the statement on the public square.
The burn allegation had been an issue in December of 2007—it was resolved with the letter of January 22, 2008. It was only after Freshwater’s statement on April 16, 2008 that the school attempted to make an issue out of it again.
The federal lawsuit filed by Freshwater against the school board gives some further explanation on this issue (John D. Freshwater, et al vs. Mount Vernon City School District Board of Education, et al --Case No. 2:09cv464):
Under "COUNT 13" "Res Judicata":
196. Defendant Board is bound by the principle or legal doctrine of Res Judicata – "a matter already judged".
197. Defendant Board's resolution asserts Plaintiff Freshwater committed actions which include matters previously adjudicated by Defendant Board’s previous administration.
198. Defendant Board previously adjudicated any and all issues reported to and acted upon or not acted upon by the previous administration.
199. Defendant Board previously adjudicated all matters reported to the then administration of Defendant Board to include matters reported by: Plaintiff Freshwater, by and through Freshwater's submitted lesson plans; by and through performance evaluations upon Freshwater; by and through reports to Defendant Weston; by and through reports to former Superintendent Maley, to include the superintendent's letter to Freshwater dated June 8, 2006; by and through Defendant White's letter to Freshwater dated January 22, 2008, which was copied to Defendant Short; and other matters.
200. In the interest of justice and equity, Plaintiff Freshwater cannot be made to answer, defend or contest matters previously affirmed, ratified or resolved by previous administrative actions of Defendant Board and Defendant Board and Plaintiff Freshwater are bound by those determinations Res Judicata from the beginning of or prior to the investigation Ab Initio.
I am sure if you post the school boards response it will tell you "their side" of the story.
Many years ago, I used to teach in public schools. Any teacher who had used a Tesla iron on a student -- for any reason -- would have been promptly fired. So my question is: regardless of anyone's religion, why wasn't this teacher fired for negligence and physical harm against a student?
Are the "religious right" extremists so morally bankrupt that they would condone burning a student with a Tesla iron?
WaveTossed said: “ Any teacher who had used a Tesla iron on a student -- for any reason -- would have been promptly fired.”
Where did you come up with the term “Tesla iron”?
The device that Freshwater used for demonstrations in his classroom was a Tesla coil—a device that produces static electricity. Many teachers in the school also allowed students to touch the sparks/static electricity.
WaveTossed said: “So my question is: regardless of anyone's religion, why wasn't this teacher fired for negligence and physical harm against a student?”
The referee and the school board cannot just look at Zachary’s arm and tell if there ever was a burn—there is no sign of the alleged burn remaining.
No one has testified in the hearing, other than the Dennis family, of seeing a burn on the arm of Zachary. At least two students have testified that they did not see a burn on the arm of Zachary. When the Dennis family made the original complaint to the school they did not permit anyone to look at Zachary’s arm.
The middle school principal, Bill White, testified October of 2008 that he was asked by Superintendant Steve Short to investigate Freshwater’s side of the story. White, however, was not permitted to look at the student’s arm. “At the point when Mr. Short gave me the pictures, he said the parents didn’t want anybody to know who they were,” White testified. “And other than going through a thousand arms at school, I wouldn’t have.”
It is a Model BD-10A High Frequency
Generator which out puts up to 50000 volts. It has not been said that the family didn't "permit" anyone to look at the arm. It was said they were concerned for the student because they had complained and wished to remain anonymous. There is a difference. At the beginning of this article there is a picture of the burn, Ms Lebo states that there was an identifying mole on the arm.
So why didn't the superindenent go look at the arm?
The company and instructions say do not come in contact with the tip or thh output. He, as the adult in the room, should have known this was not a safe thing to do. What if a child had a pace maker?
Whynow,
You’re probably right that the superintendent could have gone and looked at Zachary’s arm. (In order to comply with the family’s request for anonymity, the superintendent didn’t allow anyone else to know the family’s identity—even the principal.)
whynow said: “The company and instructions say do not come in contact with the tip or thh output. He, as the adult in the room, should have known this was not a safe thing to do.”
The investigators did not find printed instructions with the device--they obtained the instructions through contacting the company and from the company’s website.
Interestingly, one of the investigators tried the Tesla coil out on himself:
“In the presence of Principal Bill White, one of the investigators tried the device on own arm. There is a knob to adjust the voltage of the unit. When held at full power for one or two seconds in the manner described by Mr. Freshwater, the device left a slight redness with no burns and the redness disappeared overnight.” (From 2008 HROC report.)
I also believe it was stated that Mr White would not go near the device. I think because he has a pace maker. What if a student had one? That out come would be terrible.
I think it is the teachers responsibility to keep current on instruments they use in the classroom. If the investigators found the directions on line a teacher should be able to. I also think I heard that other teachers refused to touch students with it because they knew it could be dangerous and cause potential harm.
Okay, Tesla Coil. However, it's a potentially dangerous electrical device, as others have pointed out.
The teacher put the student in danger by touching him with a dangerous electric object. Period. It doesn't matter who or what religion is involved; touching a student with a dangerous electric object shouldn't be allowed in a public school.
If teachers are allowed to have students touch or "experiment with" dangerous electrical devices, then our public schools truly are in trouble (which I know they are). Especially when supervisors argue over fine points of what constitutes a "burn."
Bottom line: Freshwater was burning his students, and should have been suspended for it long before Zachary Dennis received his Tesla-coil induced stigmata.
My eighth-grade science teacher considered it great sport to teach his students about electricity by making them all grip the bare wires of a hand-crank generator. We sure learned about electricity. You can also learn about electricity from a cop with a Taser, but I wouldn't recommend the method for middle school.
For all I know, my science teacher was an adept of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. It makes no difference than it should in the Freshwater case: the sadist should have been suspended.
As a former teacher of 8th grade science and history, I must concur with the Mount Vernon Board of Education's decision to dismiss teacher John Freshwater. Mr Freshwater clearly behaved unprofessionally in interjecting his personal religious views into his teaching in a public school. Had he used hus position to promote Islam or Hinduism or any other religion the local reaction would have been swift and decisive. Public school teachers must adhere in the classroom to a policy of strict religious neutrality, whatever their personal religious beliefs might be. Further, a teacher who rejects the scientific consensus on evolution should not be teaching science.
Public schools serve religiously pluralistic communities. The Ohio Constitution is eloquent on the subject of religious liberty and church-state separation. More people should familiarize themselves with its provisions. -- Edd Doerr, President, Americans for Religious Liberty, www.arlinc.org
Edd Doerr said: “Mr Freshwater clearly behaved unprofessionally in interjecting his personal religious views into his teaching in a public school.”
I hope you realize there is a difference between an accusation and someone being found guilty.
Freshwater has stated that he did not teach religion in the classroom. He also has stated that he did not teach creationism or intelligent design.
Edd Doerr said: “Had he used hus position to promote Islam or Hinduism or any other religion the local reaction would have been swift and decisive. Public school teachers must adhere in the classroom to a policy of strict religious neutrality, whatever their personal religious beliefs might be.”
Again, all we have at the present are allegations—unless you believe that having a Bible on his desk was the promotion of his religion.
When Thom Collier--at the time a state representative--spoke at a rally held in support of John Freshwater on the town square (5-18-08), and he had this to say:
"I believe that when the smoke clears and the investigations are complete, we will still have one major question that lingers before us as a community and as a society. Can a teacher have a Bible—or a Koran, for that matter—on the corner of their desk? And for the record, yes, I have a Bible on the corner of my desk in the state house.[Applause] And if I could be so bold as to borrow a quote from Charlton Heston,'Out of my cold, dead hands'.”
I do not believe that a Bible sitting on a teacher’s desk is an act of teaching religious beliefs to the students. The Mount Vernon City Schools has even acknowledged that another teacher may keep a Bible on her desk.(See my article "'Bible on the Desk' Teacher Was Singled Out, Witness Says." )
As John Freshwater pointed out in his recent testimony, the master contract states—"Article 4: Teaching Conditions: Individual Rights"--"The Board fully recognizes all personal rights and freedoms granted to teachers by the Constitution and the laws of the State of Ohio and the United States, and will abide by all laws that pertain to the teachers it employs. Further, the Board recognizes that teachers have the right to engage in a variety of personal activities and the Board will not take disciplinary action against a teacher unless a teacher's personal activities interfere with the teacher’s performance of his/her contractual duties." Mr. Freshwater stated that his beliefs did not interfere with his performance of his duties; he did his job, a very good job—look at his students' OAT scores.(See my article “Missing Evidence in John Freshwater Hearing." )
Edd Doerr said: “Further, a teacher who rejects the scientific consensus on evolution should not be teaching science.”
I would hope that a person who says that he is president of an organization calling itself “Americans for Religious Liberty” would respect the wide variety of beliefs that exist in the United States of America. What Freshwater’s personal beliefs are should not in any way take away his right to his job. Freshwater has stated that he taught the standards—and that the standards included evolution. His students met and exceeded state standards on the OAT test.
I hope you understand that some one was giving their opinion. Others have stated that he did do the things you say he didn't.
OAT scores are based off of three years of science education. One teacher can't take credit alone for scores.
mountvernon1805, are you John Freshwater?
Maybe, his boyfriend?
You sound personally involved.
no quizzle, I feel like I should gingerly step in here since this is a thread from my article. I think this has been a good spirited discussion, so I ask you to please please refrain from personal ad hominem attacks like this.
Sorry Lauri,
I apologize, (bible bashing) bigotry just gets under my skin. How can anybody defend a bully that burns children, no matter what religion they hide behind. It won’t happen again.
Quizzle,
I live within the Mount Vernon School District and have been following the controversy closely. I find it troubling that some people hear, or read, an accusation and assume that it is true.
What if you found yourself in a similar situation?
I too live in the area and have been following this. The teacher has changed his story multiple times. I find that troubling. I also find it troubling that we can't trust the teachers our school has hired.
"As a former teacher of 8th grade science and history, I must concur with the Mount Vernon Board of Education's decision to dismiss teacher John Freshwater. Mr Freshwater clearly behaved unprofessionally in interjecting his personal religious views into his teaching in a public school."
Actually, my point of disagreement is the following: Mr. Freshwater behaved unprofessionally by touching one of his students with a dangerous electric object, potentially harming the student. It doesn't matter what religious beliefs he (or anyone) has. I don't understand how religious beliefs got involved in all of this. I'll say it again: public schools are truly in real trouble when they allow dangerous teaching practices to be followed.
It's interesting to me how all of these separate issues seem to have been mixed together until it's a complete mess. This at least seems clear:
1. You shouldn't mark students with a Tesla coil, even if that mark is temporary. The shape of the mark should be irrelevant. It seems this would be enough to fire Freshwater.
2. Displaying the Ten Commandments in the classroom would seem to conflict with the federal ruling for Roy Moore to remove the Ten Commandments monument from the state courtroom in 2003. It appears that Freshwater agreed to take it down, but how was it allowed to be up in the first place?
The rest seems murkier, but at least these two issues should no longer be a part of the conversation. I just wonder who made the initial push to make this a civil liberties issue. $500,000 later, I'm sure the school district is wondering the same thing.
It seems to me the focus moved quickly away from the issue of violence against children. Our culture views modern schooling through opaque lenses. A child was burned by the deliberate action of a teacher. Maybe he was careless, maybe not. No matter. The man should not be teaching anymore, anywhere.
What kind of culture treats children as if they were cattle? Ours for sure, in more ways than branding. They are forced to be in school buildings en masse for the better part of their youth, herded about by their handlers, the teachers. The ones who burn them aren't the only ones who fail to honor their human dignity.
Until we change the education paradigm of "captive audience" there will always be those who use the coercive school environment to exploit children for their pet cause, whether or not it is religious.
Strange teacher. What kind of experiments? I think teachers like that are not eligible to become a teacher. oaoaoa... That's an example of people who do not really understand the essence of the Bible, and just play it dirty.
I think when trials like this kick off it's easy to lose track of the basic issue that started it all.
The bottom line is that regardless or not if Freshwater had conducted the experiment on 20 or 200 students, in this one case it caused physical damage to the student. The teacher should be penalised in accordance to this, not his religious beliefs.
If his religious beliefs are called into question as a result of the inquest into that event, then a separate inquiry should be conducted leaving the boy and his family out of it.
Sam
Comments closed
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.