Memo to Stephanie Updike: Actions Have Consequences

Former board member Stephanie Updike was called to testify in August 2012, in Sisney’s defamation lawsuit.  The remaining defendants are the three board members who voted to fire Sisney, and the Broken Arrow School District.  Updike filed a letter with the judge complaining about the $2400 in legal fees that she had incurred as a result of being called to testify.  She claims that she was treated as a “hostile witness” because she voted to keep Sisney.  In a move exhibiting monumental gall, she asks the judge to make the Broken Arrow School District pay her attorney’s bill for attending her deposition.

Ms. Updike, you are a hostile witness, but not because of the way you voted.  You have behaved in a hostile manner toward the District you claim to be concerned about, and you have personally contributed to the outrageous legal costs the District has had to incur.

You participated in Sisney’s obviously bogus attack on Air Assurance, you helped him smear board members who had done nothing wrong, you lied repeatedly to the public, you inaccurately blamed the three board members for the legal fees you helped Sisney incur, you schemed to trick well-meaning but uninformed citizens into spreading your falsehoods and venom, you leaked confidential board information to Sisney’s camp, you provided biased and false information and testimony to the state auditor.  Throughout it all, you continually tried to stir up conflict and anger toward the people who really cared about our kids enough to remove the threat that exposed the District to further financial loss, legal risks, and losses of teachers and staff.

How much have Ms. Updike’s antics cost the District, Air Assurance, the three board members, and others who were dragged into this under Sisney’s coverup scheme?  A lot more than $2400.  She claims in her letter that Bo Rainey has been very aggressive in his questioning, and is obviously “trying to twist my words or trick me into saying something that would impair my integrity or implicate me in illegal actions.”  I believe aggressive questioning is in order, considering Ms. Updike has done many things that impugn her integrity.  Given the unethical things she has been proven to have done, I have no reason to believe she would balk at illegal actions.  No “twisting” or “tricking” is required – her proven actions speak for themselves.  I have to wonder if her complaints about Rainey’s questioning are really intended to explain away any admissions of wrongdoing she had to make in her deposition – as if anything she admitted was just a result of Rainey’s crafty interrogation and twisting her words.  Say it with me:  “Stay the victim.”

After everything she has helped Sisney put innocent people through, she complains about having to answer hard questions about her misbehavior, spend 10 hours  testifying (put that up against the time the Rampeys and the three board members have had to put into this), and spend $2400 in legal fees.  What astounding nerve.

As Ms. Updike is fond of admonishing others, “Actions have consequences.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s