He'd look a lot better wearing a necktie.
Posted on 08/04/2006 9:44:23 AM PDT by Smogger
ONTARIO - A 28-year-old substitute teacher arrested Thursday on suspicion of molesting a 10-year-old girl may have molested more than 100 children over the past three years. Ontario resident Eric Norman Olsen, 28, was arrested Thursday at the Ontario Police Department when he came in for an interview with detectives, said Ontario police Detective Diane Galindo. Olsen was arrested around 3:20 p.m., Galindo said.
Police began their investigation on June 13 after a student reported that Olsen had inappropriately touched a 10-year-old female student. That student reported the incident to a staff member and the police were contacted. The alleged lewd acts occurred at Berlyn Elementary in the Ontario/Montclair School District.
The victim told investigators that Olsen touched her inappropriately on several occasions, the police statement said. During one incident, Olsen is alleged to have used force to touch the victim.
Olsen claims to have molested between 100 and 200 female children over a three-year time period, police said.
Olsen may have molested the other children while he was employed at various school districts within the Inland Empire.
Investigators said they do not believe Olsen is making false claims on the number of children he admitted to molesting "because of the way he explained it to us," Galindo said.
Police do not yet know if Olsen has a previous arrest record.
Olsen committed the lewd acts with the victim while other children were in the classroom over a two-and-a-half-hour time period, the statement said.
"Any type of touching with a teacher is mis-appropriate," Galindo said. "The way he touched them, and his reaction to the way he touched them, leads us to believe it was deliberately mis-appropriate."
Olsen was immediately removed from the classroom once the investigation began, Galindo said.
The California Commission on Teacher Credentialing Web site has Olsen listed as holding a valid credential in the state of California. However, no further information was immediately available on the status of that credential.
By early Thursday evening, Galindo said police had not yet searched Olsen's Ontario apartment.
The 28-year-old told police he is employed with the Fontana Unified School District. Officials from that district could not be reached for comment.
Detectives did not arrest Olsen immediately because they wanted to ensure they could present a solid case to the District Attorney's Office, Galindo said.
"We had to complete the statements," Galindo said. "We had to have everything neat. We wanted to do a full investigation."
James Kidwell, deputy superintendent of human resources for the Ontario/Montclair School District, said he was unaware of the allegations when contacted during a regularly scheduled school board meeting Thursday night. He did say other school officials may have been aware of the allegations.
Kidwell said the district subjects substitute teachers to background checks, which include fingerprinting.
Such precautions do not always prevent would-be predators from slipping under the radar, Galindo said.
"If he's never been arrested before they wouldn't have found anything anyway."
Olsen has been booked into West Valley Detention Center in Rancho Cucamonga on suspicion of one count of committing lewd acts with a child under the age of 14 and on suspicion of using force to commit a lewd act on a child under 14, Galindo said.
Olsen is not married and has no children of his own.
Police believe there are other victims who have not yet come forward. Anyone with information on this investigation is asked to call Ontario police Detective Gary Naranjo at (909) 395-2764. The Daily Bulletin can be reached by phone at (909) 987-6397. The city desk can be reached at citydesk@dailybulletin.com.
Dear GovernmentShrinker,
I agree that it is appalling that some bishops engaged in cover-ups.
However, your second premise doesn't go over all that well for me. The fact is that parents put their children in the care of teachers, principals, and other folks in the schools. The overwhelming majority of children under the age of 18 are looked after, on a daily basis, directly, by public school teachers and principals.
From my perspective, this is perhaps the one set of folks (with the possible exception of cops) who I'd hold to as high a standard as Catholic hierarchs. It is quite literally part of their job description to care for and protect the children left in their charge for six or more hours per day. It is an extremely minimal expectation that these individuals not actively, maliciously harm their charges.
"In this particular case, the guy didn't have 'a place of employment,' he was working in many different schools on an irregular schedule as a substitute teacher."
From my perspective, that makes it worse, in that there weren't just a few individuals who might have been tipped off to his actions, but possibly dozens and dozens. I might buy that a few folks noticed nothing, or were naive. But dozens and dozens? Doesn't fly with me.
As well, the magnitude of things is a little out-of-balanced. The media were completely outraged that 10,000 children were molested by Catholic priests over a 50 year period. It was a major, national story, as well it should have been.
But these same folks seem rather ho-hum that 100,000 kids are molested in public schools every year.
If one story it sensational, the second is earth-shattering.
sitetest
Apparently dozens and dozens of parents noticed nothing amiss with their children's behavior, and had relationships with their children such that they children didn't tell them about things like this. If the parents have that sort of relationship with their children, they can hardly expect the unionized school teachers and educrats to detect this sort (and children who won't share such inof with their parents aren't likely to share it with school personnel either). Sure, school personnel SHOULD be the sort of people one could hold to the highest standards, but in reality we know it would be naive to expect them to behave like anything but the union hacks and bureaucrats they are.
I'd be a lot happier with your indictment of these parents and children if this story had detailed what the "inappropriate touching" consisted of.
If it were touching their shoulder or such during some type of public encounter, that might explain a whole bunch that may have been left out of this story.
Dear GovernmentShrinker,
"Apparently dozens and dozens of parents noticed nothing amiss with their children's behavior, and had relationships with their children such that they children didn't tell them about things like this."
Yes, but each child had but one or two parents, while each child was observed by dozens of school personnel. As well, the abuser was observed likely by a hundred or more school personnel.
That one or two parents might fail their individual child seems plausible. That all these school personnel would fail hundreds of children, and fail to observe things awry with this exemplar of public school values seems far less plausible.
The alternative explanation, and one that is far more plausible to me, is that some folks noticed things awry, and turned the other way, or perhaps even actively covered up.
However, if you wish to blame parents, also, who send their children to public schools, I won't stop you from making that argument.
"If the parents have that sort of relationship with their children, they can hardly expect the unionized school teachers and educrats to detect this sort (and children who won't share such inof with their parents aren't likely to share it with school personnel either)."
Why not? Many of these children likely have more contact with their teachers than with their parents. As well, experienced teachers and principals, having seen literally thousands of children, likely have better skills at catching this kind of thing.
Remember, it only takes one concerned adult to make a difference in a case like this. Obviously, there were none here. A more scathing indictment of a system allegedly dedicated specifically to the well-being of children is difficult to imagine.
"Sure, school personnel SHOULD be the sort of people one could hold to the highest standards, but in reality we know it would be naive to expect them to behave like anything but the union hacks and bureaucrats they are."
Then where is the lamestream media on this? Whether they're hacks or not, you concede that we should hold these folks WHOM WE PAY WITH OUR TAX DOLLARS to the highest standards.
As a Catholic, I was told, often by the lamestream media, that I was morally guilty of the crimes of my hierarchs because I continue to go to Catholic Church and give money to the Church.
At least the Catholic Church did things to clean up its act (starting in the mid-1980s, having largely resolved the problem of priest-abusers by the early or mid-1990s).
What is the moral guilt of everyone who backs the public school system, and continues to extort more money out of folks like me who have no use for the system? Why doesn't the media cover that?
Looks like cover-up to me, starting with the teachers and principals, and the other educrats, and extending right to the media.
sitetest
It talks about what he said of his reactions to the touching. Make your own judgement. It seems clear that it was more than just a shoulder. For some people, a pat on the butt is exciting. Others prefer a belt!
I know social workers who would like to throw the guy in jail if he merely said, "What the heck are you talking about? It was only a touch on the shoulder. I've done that with hundreds of my students!"
In fact, the whole story could well be based on something like that, from my reading of it. It could well be much more serious, though, and may well be. I merely stated that I would like like to see this "inappropriate touching" (as the article generically says) more well defined before I indict the children or their parents.
"Any type of touching with a teacher is mis-appropriate," Galindo said. "The way he touched them, and his reaction to the way he touched them, leads us to believe it was deliberately mis-appropriate."
I don't think the parents did anything, It's just not clear what exactly he did.
"Uh, it's not *that* Ontario."
Not everyone that reads is from California. Many references to Ontario in this article, without clarification, leads some of us (near Canada) to think of the other option.
No surprise that it's the one in Cali!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.