Wasson's detailed statement was a public rebuttal to an accusatory process that had, until that point, been very private. The examiner, Patricia Fisher of Oakland, also apparently linked Wasson to the letters through an analysis of the handwriting on some of their envelopes. Bertoli contends the surreptitious investigation itself violated Wasson's constitutional and contractual rights of due process. They didn't do any of that. But in this and other recent employment disputes at SRJC, aggrieved workers charge that the district is twisting confidentiality to the employees' disadvantage.
Confidentiality then serves to conceal abuse and violation.
The administration responded by asking Wasson to file sexual harassment charges against Bell, which she refused to do because she deemed it inappropriate. But Wasson found herself trapped in a professional gulag. Through it all, Wasson adds, she has maintained excellent evaluations, including one round that was completed just days before her dismissal. A crucial question in Wasson's case centers on whether the disputed letters are protected under the constitutional right to freedom of speech. Sonoma County Superior Court Judge Lawrence Sawyer is due to rule on that on April 16.