Another poster is correct this is not hearsay. It is direct evidence.
Maybe people need to read the article instead of the excerpt. This teacher has a history of making remarks that can be seen as causing a problem.
I am a teacher and I have heard what some teachers say to students. I am no angel in that regard but the students respect me because I “tell it like it is.” I don’t blow smoke up their butts. The special ed kids tell me they are stupid. I respond they are not stupid just lazy.
This guy sounds like he is trying to perhaps joke with students but doesn’t understand he has to know his audience prior to any jokes.
I know my kids and I know which ones I can joke with and those I cannot. This guy seems like he can not judge when to kid and when to shut up.
How is that “direct evidence”? Student’s word against teacher’s. Hearsay.
Also, the opinion of the “referee” is wrong.
A state referee investigating Voigt found that explanation was not credible.Every time with similar hearsay accusations? I smell setup.
The referee also found Voigt had made other offensive comments in class over the years, including an accusation that in 2008, he trained his laser pointer at a black student and said he looked like “an African-American Rudolph.” Voigt told school officials that he was only repeating what another student had said but later acknowledged his conduct had been inappropriate.
In 2012, Voigt was accused of calling a student stupid and implying that he and some of his classmates were gay. In that incident, Voigt denied making any insulting comments to students and told school officials that a group of students in his class were colluding against him.
The state referee found Voigt’s explanation for those two incidents to also be not credible. …
“Another poster is correct this is not hearsay. It is direct evidence.”
I’m guessing you don’t teach law. Technically this is hearsay as “an out of court statement offered to prove the truth of the matter being asserted.” However, it is admissible as only one of the many exceptions to the hearsay rule. Admissibility of the statement has nothing to do with being “direct evidence.”
Out of court statements made by the party being sued can be admitted under certain circumstances, and often are. Hearsay is one of the most difficult concepts for any lawyer or law student (or layperson) to grasp b/c of the many exceptions to the rule coupled with the fact that an objection must be made in court practically simultaneous to testimony.
Bottom line, it is hearsay that can be admitted.