– Closing Points O –

O.1 What else can be said about Janice Sargeant’s racist actions? She refused to hold a Caucasian student accountable for racist behavior in a classroom at her school.

  • This is similar to Christopher McInnis and Jacqueline Ravazzolo who refused to hold Caucasian students Marcus, Natasha and Hunter accountable for their extremely nasty, hateful and physical actions against the applicant while attending Connaught Public school.

O.2 Janice Sargeant declined to hold Kevin Elzinga seriously accountable for confessing that he did nothing during a racist interaction that occurred while in his classroom.

  • This again sounds a lot like Christopher McInnis and his lack of interest in getting to the truth about Jacqueline Ravazzolo obvious racist behavior against the applicant.

O.3 Janice Sargeant refused to hold Cameron Stone accountable for the deliberate and blatant lie about a fake racial incident that never occurred in his presence.

  • And once again this sounds a lot like Christopher McInnis and his lack of interest in getting to the truth about Jacqueline Ravazzolo obvious racist behavior against the applicant.
  • And once again this sounds a lot like Warren Hoshizaki and Mary Anne Gage and their lack of interest in getting to the truth about Kevin Maddalena sudden appearance in a conversation over a year later.

O.4 Janice Sargeant attempted to segregate the applicant to a separate room to learn and study in order to avoid having to intervene and address a Caucasian student’s discriminatory and bullying behavior.

  • This sounds a lot like what the DSBN, Warren Hoshizaki and Mary Anne Gage tried to do when only offering suggestions for the applicant to return to school by either go back to the bully Kevin Maddalena class or stay out of a Connaught Public School altogether.

O.5 At this point there is absolutely no need to quote any particular articles or research on the negative effects of segregating a student under any circumstances, especially when it is done only to avoid dealing with a racist Caucasian student and a classroom of bullies!

O.6 Nonetheless, the DSBN, Warren Hoshizaki, Mary Anne Gage, and Janice Sargeant consistently attempted to impose a standard that either subjected the applicant to the same uncomfortable environment or kept him at home or in a room by himself during class.

O.7 Why would the DSBN, Warren Hoshizaki and Mary Anne Gage and Janice Sargeant possible think that isolating the applicant is the best option verses addressing the problems themselves? Because the DSBN, Warren Hoshizaki, Mary Anne Gage and Janice Sargeant in their minds were addressing with the problem, the problem was the Black applicant and his parents!

O.8 Remember, by this time, that it was never about doing what was in the best interest of the applicant, but rather about what was best for the DSBN and its co-defendants.

O.9 You want proof? Janice Sargeant allowed racist Caucasian student, Kevin Elzinga and Cameroon Stone to walk away without any disciplinary action for what they did! And the Geography class knew it and at that very point things began to escalate out of control to the point where the applicant had no choice but to want to stop going.

O.10 You want proof? Janice Sargeant permitted racist and bully Caucasian student(s), teachers Kevin Elzinga and Cameroon Stone to walk away without there being any discipline for their actions! And then there was a Geography class who knew it, and things quickly spiraled out of control, leaving the applicant with no alternative but to withdraw.

O.11 Again – No Consequences Equals Repeated Behavior!

O.12 And as Janice Sargeant does nothing to address the racist behavior of the Caucasian student, Kevin Elzinga and Cameroon Stone. And she still continues to make statements like “We do not, and will not tolerate racism, discrimination, or violence in our schools or in our communities.”

O.13 But by now we have learned that these types of statements from DSBN employees like Janice Sargeant are worthless and are only talking points with empty sincerity. And do you think this is unusual, or a one-time occurrence? No, this is standard procedure throughout all school boards.

O.14 Like the DSBN, the Sudbury Catholic School Board makes similar statements like “Our Values Modelling Jesus in the world through: Faith — Respect — Community — Innovation — Learning”

O.15 And still employees like Stefano Presenza, a trustee had to resign from a Sudbury Catholic School Board after complaints were lodged earlier against him. The compliant stated that Stefano Presenza was sharing and liking transphobic and racist content online. And after receiving the complaint the Sudbury Catholic School Board had a meeting with trustee, Stefano Presenza to discuss his transphobic and racist online activity.

Stefano Presenza A.K.A. Steve Prezzi

O.16 The chair of the board, Michael Bellmore, stated “We take situations like that seriously… We did some background research. We had a discussion. My understanding is that Stefano Presenza VOLUNTARILY removed the transphobic and racist online activity from his social media presence and we considered that to be resolved.”

O.17 WOW, let us talk about not dealing with the issue. A teacher who has access to children, who is supposed to be an extraordinary mentor, who, without fear posted and liked “transphobic and racist online activity” on his personal social media. Was ONLY asked to voluntarily remove the inappropriate content “and at that point Sudbury Catholic school board trustee considered that to be resolved.”

O.18 And where in their “Bible” does their “Jesus” make “transphobic and racist” comments?

O.19 Oh, that’s right, he doesn’t! And yet it appears that the Sudbury Catholic School Board allows Stefano Presenza to walk away, because Stefano Presenza “Values modelling Jesus in the world through: Faith — Respect — Community — Innovation — Learning”

O.20 Could you IMAGINE as a HRTO employee doing this shit on your own personal social media account, and what would happen to you when the HRTO discovered it? You would be fired and sent off to the unemployment line without hesitation and before your ass could warm your office seat up!

O.21 But NOT WHEN YOU WORK FOR A SCHOOL BOARD! You get to instant immunity and are able to walk way without any consequences and you get keep your job. Let’s talk about hypocrisy!

O.22 Definition of hypocrisy: the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one’s own behavior does not conform.

O.23 Hmm… that sums up the DSBN and probably almost every other school board in Canada!

O.24 Hypocrisy is when Janice Sargeant states things like the applicant should feel “safe and had a positive experience in class… supported and reassured that Thorold Secondary is a safe and inclusive school” and then wants to segregate the applicant because she does not want to address the conduct of a predominantly Caucasian Geography class about their disgusting behavior!

O.25 But wait, the unbelievable and timeless story of Stefano Presenza gets better. Remember when we spoke about – No Consequences Equals Repeated Behavior. Well because there were no consequences for Stefano Presenza outrageous and fearless transphobic and racist activity on social media, and that he was allowed to merrily go about his business to reoffend. That is exactly what he did!

O.26 Sudbury Catholic School Board co-chair Laura O’Gorman explains that Stefano Presenza still continued his online activity after he VOLUNTARILY removed it, this time under the pseudonym of Steve Prezzi.

O.27 Ms. O’Gorman documented several more instances of “Steve Prezzi” doing more “Christian and Jesus” things like sharing posts meant to out celebrities for being transgender and making anti-LGBTQ+ comments.

O.28 And there you have it folks! The repeat offender strikes again only because the Sudbury Catholic School Board refused to address his ridicules and unacceptable behavior accordingly the first time.

O.29 Remember – No Consequences Equals Repeated Behavior!

O.30 Meaning, will Kevin Elzinga and Cameron Stone repeat their racist behavior? No one knows, but based on the evidence of how individuals in this whole situation have behaved when they were allowed to get away with their intolerable behavior against the applicant and his parents. It seems likely there is a pretty good chance it will happen again.

O.31 What the DSBN, Warren Hoshizaki and Janice Sargeant don’t seem to grasp is the same thing Evan Balgord, executive director of the Canadian Anti-Hate Network, speaks about. “What a trustee shares or likes online it can have repercussions on the schools, parents and students they represent. When they see [trustees] sharing content that belittles, discriminates against or spreads hatred towards diverse communities and groups, it can send a very negative message.”

Read More – A Trustee Resigns From A Sudbury School Board As Some Question His Behaviour On Social Media

O.32 But according to the DSBN, Warren Hoshizaki and Janice Sargeant the behavior of Kevin Elzinga and Cameroon Stone behavior did not have any negative repercussions, hence why they never dealt with it.

O.33 And yes all members of the school community including Janice Sargeant must NOT:

  • engage in bullying behaviors, including cyberbullying;
  • nflict or encourage others to inflict bodily harm on another person
  • engage in hate propaganda and other forms of behavior motivated by hate or bias


O.34 And yes, principals like Janice Sargeant under the direction of their school boards, take a leadership role in the daily operation of a school. They must provide leadership by:

  • demonstrating care for the school community and a commitment to student achievement and well-being in a safe, inclusive, and accepting learning environment
  • holding everyone under their authority accountable for their own behavior and actions
  • empowering students to be positive leaders in their school and community
  • communicating regularly and meaningfully with all members of their school community

O.35 And yet here we are, because Janice Sargeant refused to uphold her mandated obligations to protect the applicant form harm, bullying and cruel treatment for no other reason than because he was Black!

O.36 As a result, Janice Sargeant must recognize that her purposeful ignorance and discriminating behavior toward the applicant and his family are not justifiable. Among other things, her prejudiced and discriminating actions caused mental anguish, emotional pain, fury, and duress to a Black child/student and his family.

O.37 Janice Sargeant cannot be freed of responsibility for failing to effectively and fairly address the abuse, neglect, and harm that the applicant and his family suffered as a result of her actions.

O.38 And as many employees do at the DSBN. It appears that Janice Sargeant has now begun to remain mute, refusing to discuss her actions or any other concerns with the applicant’s parents until the applicant comes in to speak with her. Janice Sargeant was evasive in her limited original explanation and has now opted to completely disregard any of the parents current questions and concerns .

O.39 Janice Sargeant must face serious financial penalties from the HRTO, demonstrating to her and everyone else in the DSBN and its racist culture that these types of purposeful acts are unacceptable and will not be tolerated.

O.40 The HRTO must send the message that remaining silent in the face of parental concerns and questions about their children’s well-being and safety while interacting with DSBN employees is unacceptable and contradicts the DSBN and its employees’ constant encouragement of open communication between the DSBN and parents on their website, updates, and emails.

O.41 Parents have the legal right to know who has access to their children. And that they receive a thorough and accurate breakdown, as well as an honest explanation, if there is a bad contact between a school personnel and their child. That refusing to speak and keeping silent and failing to communicate with all members of their school community on a regular and meaningful basis is unacceptable!

O.42 And that if a school board and/or employees continue to practice these unsettling behaviors of remaining silent and not enforcing appropriate disciplinary action in these types of matters. It will draw a negative inference towards the employees and the school board with the HRTO when making any order. The HRTO must let school boards and their e employees understand that silence is neither a defense nor a kind of protection against being held accountable for inappropriate and racist behavior.

O.43 If the HRTO is truly committed to ending racism in our school boards and schools, it must impose severe financial penalties that make it abundantly clear that racism in our school boards and schools is no longer acceptable—or you and your employees, retired or not, will face financial consequences!