patching...
Welcome back, Patch Blogger!

UPDATED: Case Against Hartland Administrator Over Underage Drinking at Grad Party Dismissed

Tracey Sahouri's attorney: 'We're very happy. … This is the way the justice system should work.'

 

FLINT — Charges that a Hartland School District administrator and her husband allowed underage drinking during their child's graduation party this past summer were dismissed Thursday.

"We're very happy," said Michael Manley, attorney for Hartland High School assistant principal Tracey Sahouri and her husband, Raed.

"This is the way the justice system should work. … I commend the prosecutor's office for what we believe is doing the right thing."

The dismissal of the misdemeanor tickets against the couple came after the defense submitted additional evidence that contradicted the original police investigation, according to Manley, who sees the decision as a vindication for his clients.

John Potbury, a special assistant Genesee County prosecutor, declined to comment on whether the new evidence was a factor in the decision.

"Based on all the evidence that we have available in this case, we have determined we can't sustain our burden of proof, so the case was dismissed," Potbury said.

The case was scheduled for trial Thursday before 67th District Judge Mark McCabe in Flint. After the dismissal, both Sahouris could be seen shaking their attorney's hand, but didn't make any public statements after the hearing.

Manley said Tracey Sahouri doesn't want to comment until at least she has a chance to meet with district officials about her job situation.

"They're looking forward to the holidays with their family," he said. "It's been a gift (to end the case)."

Sahouri was principal at Creekside Elementary School until she was investigated on an unrelated issue of a security breach during MEAP test preparation.

Hartland Superintendent Janet Sifferman told Hartland Patch on Thursday that Sahouri will remain in her current post for at least the rest of the school year.

"It doesn't mean that can't change later, but that's the end of it right now," Sifferman said.

Manley said Sahouri wants what's best for students.

"If that's her being reinstated, great. If that's her being reassigned, great," he said. "I don't think she would want to be in a position where she would be a distraction. It wouldn't be good for the kids. Her No. 1 priority is the kids and I think the district's No. 1 priority is the kids."

Sifferman said the case's dismissal supports the district's decision to wait for the court case to conclude, which allowed her to remain on the job this school year.

"We are extremely happy that Ms. Sahouri has been vindicated of these charges and can now move forward," she said in a statement released to area news media.

The tickets were issued over the summer after a July 9 graduation party at the couple's Argentine Township home in which a 15-year-old Linden teen needed to be hospitalized for drinking too much alcohol.

Police said the Sahouris were aware of underage drinking and took no action to stop it, but the couple maintained they followed the law by calling authorities once they learned about the drinking.

Manley, who had questioned the motives of police, said the new evidence his investigation uncovered proved the Sahouris' innocence and that he was prepared to have several witnesses testify that they were unaware of the drinking and the alcohol was being hidden.

Argentine Township Police Chief Dan Allen was not immediately available for comment.

The case drew attention from regional media outlets on a story that drew more than a 100 comments on one Hartland Patch article alone. The commentary ranged from supporting the Sahouris to arguments for having her placed on administrative leave and even a few calls for her firing.

Manley said the criticism was tough on the Sahouris, who weren't used to such media attention. He said they want to thank those who backed them.

"I know the Sahouris wish to thank the hundreds of supporters who sent cards, letters, emails and phone calls to them," Manley said.

"If there's one (thing) I'd like to ask the Hartland community — Please let me know where I can go to get her reputation back? It's a classic example of why we shouldn't prejudge a case before the process gets done."

Charlotte

11:32 am on Thursday, December 8, 2011

Chris, could you explain how the process works? For example, was a jury involved in the decision or does the judge listen to opening arguments (or something similar) and make a decision on whether to proceed with the trial? Thanks for keeping the community informed.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Christofer Machniak

11:42 am on Thursday, December 8, 2011

Hi Charlotte,

The prosecutor reviewed the case and decided not to proceed before any trial proceedings started. We're trying to speak with him to get more specifics behind the decision.

- Chris

Jordan Genso

11:37 am on Thursday, December 8, 2011

I am glad to see that "innocent until proven guilty" still applies to our justice system. I wish it applied equally in the court of public opinion, but at least this should (hopefully) put an end to the pitchforks and torches.

Reply

Paddle the Mitten & SUP MI

12:02 pm on Thursday, December 8, 2011

Okay, so I'm confused who would be held responsible and what happened to the girl who had to be taken to the hospital and her parents? Was their other underage kids that were at the party? Was she the only one who was drinking? I haven't followed this case, was anyone help responsible? Too many questions. I'll try to read previous stories. Principals, teachers and underage kids drinking together certainly sounds like a no-no. At least in my book.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Christofer Machniak

2:47 pm on Thursday, December 8, 2011

Hi L.B.,

It's my understanding that no MIPs were issued as the party broke up quickly once it became a medical situation … The first responders and police were most concerned with helping the teen. … The 15-year-old also wasn't issued an MIP because she was considered a victim by police.

- Chris

Kim

2:35 pm on Thursday, December 8, 2011

I had never met Tracey Sahouri prior to reading or hearing about this. I believed, from what I heard, that she was innocent. Since all of this has happened I have had the chance to talk to Tracey Sahouri. When speaking with her and hearing how she was handling a situation at the High School I knew that she should not be found guilty. The problem is the media. Sorry Hartland Patch, unfortunatly some medai outlets do not tell the whole story and that makes it hard for those who give us the facts. They tell you what they want to in order to make the story news worthy. We as an outsider we need to hear all the facts and not draw a conclusion until all the facts are out. So happy for the Sahouris.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Jordan Genso

2:58 pm on Thursday, December 8, 2011

I do not find fault with Hartland Patch's reporting of this story. The reporting provided a forum for the public lynching, but the public is to blame there, not the media outlet whose job it is to report the information they had.

Kim, I am open to agreeing with you though if you can point to parts of the story that Hartland Patch had reasonable access to yet failed to print, or if Hartland Patch printed any information that was inaccurate. I don't believe Hartland Patch is guilty of either of those, but it's possible I am wrong. And if I am wrong, it should be easy to identify how.

But to fault the media for reporting the known facts of the situation, even if those known facts are used to distort the reality of the situation by some, is illogical in my opinion.

Comment_arrow

hartland eagle

6:04 pm on Thursday, December 8, 2011

It wasn't the media. It was anonymous types posting on the internet.

Hooray for Tracy.

Comment_arrow

Kim

7:29 pm on Thursday, December 8, 2011

Jordan, You, and maybe others, misunderstood my post. I was saying sorry to the Hartland Patch because other media types report only what they want the public to hear.

Comment_arrow

Jordan Genso

11:25 am on Friday, December 9, 2011

I want to apologize Kim for misreading your comment. Sorry. Another look at it now shows that the mistake was completely on my end.

Comment_arrow

Kim

2:50 pm on Friday, December 9, 2011

Jordan, no to apologizes necessary. We can not always tell the tone in which someone is typing. lol. Just glad I could clarify for everyone.

Cindy Kohli

3:12 pm on Thursday, December 8, 2011

ANYONE who knows Tracey or has had ANY contact with her knows what kind of person she is. Her reputation in our minds ( those of us who know her) continues to be nothing less than it was prior to all of this craziness as we never questioned what happened and how it was responded to by one of the most compassionate and caring people you could EVER have cross your path! There are many families and children at Creekside who are still very LOST without her.

Reply

Laura Bickel

3:44 pm on Thursday, December 8, 2011

Eventually, the truth always comes out. I am glad this family can have the situation put to rest. Shake the dust off, Mrs. Sahouri and enjoy the rest of the school year.

Reply

Michele Gonzalez

9:46 am on Friday, December 9, 2011

I am SO HAPPY for the Sahouri's and Tracey! Her reputation shouldn't have been tarnished and honestly, I think they should pursue civil action against that police department. I am praying that she can get her carrier back on track and not have to go through anymore drama from this. Congrats Tracey!!!
It's also nice to finally see some justice prevail for once too!!!

Reply
Comment_arrow

NotLazy

12:26 pm on Friday, December 9, 2011

Michele,
I find it interesting that you are "so happy" that "Tracy's reputation shouldn’t have been tarnished", yet you think the police department should be held civilly liable. Why go down the same path to tarnish their reputation without knowing what their investigation revealed. As I recall reading the news about this incident, witnesses changed their statements that they initially gave to the police.

Comment_arrow

stephanie pytlowanyj

7:16 pm on Saturday, December 10, 2011

Are you serious, sue the police department, for what, doing their jobs?
Per a statement in the December 11, 2011 Tri County Times, the special assistant prosecutor, John Potbury stated, "After reviewing all the available evidence, we have determined we cannot sustain our burden of proof."
The police and legal system did their jobs, can you possibly give it a rest?

Comment_arrow

Michele Gonzalez

7:58 pm on Sunday, December 11, 2011

This police dept clearly decided to go after the Sahouris. They've cause irrepairable damage to a persons reputation which has affected her lively hood and has caused a tremendous financial burden on this family. Obviously the police dept and prosecutor did NOT have any evidence and decided to pursue a false case against someone. How would you feel if this happened to either one of you?

Another question that I haven't seen on here? Where is the prosecution of the girl that was a MIP? How come her partents aren't help responsible for their minors actions?

Robin Dorner

1:21 pm on Friday, December 9, 2011

I am very happy to hear that the ticket was dismissed! Tracey has been missed by all of the Creekside families! Despite the "witch hunt", there were far more supporters of the Sahouri's than there were critics. I am glad that they can put this behind them and enjoy the rest of the school year!

Reply
Comment_arrow

Michele Gonzalez

7:58 pm on Sunday, December 11, 2011

Very well put Robin and I agree. Unfortunately, there are alot of kids that still miss her.

stephanie pytlowanyj

12:41 am on Saturday, December 10, 2011

Looking at the dirt Ms. Sahouri has brought unto Creekside, I wouldn't want my kid in that building, let alone school district.
And, I certainly wouldn't want to be on staff in the building with Sahouri as an administrator. The Patch article on the problem with the MEAP's has certainly convinced me of that.
How Sifferman can continue to protect and defend Sahouri is beyond me.
Again, only in Hartland!

Reply
Comment_arrow

Kim Schemansky

8:19 pm on Sunday, December 11, 2011

Well then it's a good thing that you AREN'T in our district. The majority of us who are, are happy that Mrs. Sifferman and the school board allowed the justice system do their job and not jump to conclusions. The fact that you continue to comment on this topic and degraded our community, while you do not live here, baffles me. Someone else mentioned you must have a personal axe to grind...doesn't seem that far-fetched to me.

Neutral

2:31 pm on Saturday, December 10, 2011

The fact is that the charges were dismissed.
Another fact, teens are not logical beings, they do dumb things and hide them from their parents. Most parents silently supported the Sahouri's and thanked God above that it wasn't their kid who did something like this.
If you are at all honest with yourself this could happen to any one of us with teens.
Stop the attacks.

Reply
Comment_arrow

stephanie pytlowanyj

3:43 pm on Saturday, December 10, 2011

Did you read the report by the Michigan Department of Education and regarding Creekside MEAP's? The report states the facts of an adults action, specifically Ms. Sahouri. This report states: Ms. Sahouri left the investigative staff waiting while Sahouri conducted "impromptu" meetings with "select" staff. Ms. Sahouri comprised the investigation by having the investigators conduct interviews in an office adjacent to her's. Ms. Sahouri personally escorted staff and didn't present them in the order as requested by the investigators. Ms. Sahouri "interrupted" several interviews and "debriefed" staff after meeting with investigators. She finally approached the investigators asking why certain questions were being asked.
There then is a list of 5 remediation items Creekside will have now have to follow.
I may be incorrect but I believe this will cost the school district $10,000.00
Again, how can Sifferman continue to defend Sahouri's actions. It's time for the school board to step in and take a good look at what has occurred at Creekside.

Neutral

6:19 pm on Saturday, December 10, 2011

Interesting that you thought my post was aimed at you Stephanie-it was a general comment, not aimed at anyone.

Reply
Comment_arrow

stephanie pytlowanyj

7:10 pm on Saturday, December 10, 2011

I responded to your post b/c it followed mine...made sense to me.
What doesn't make sense is Sahouri's supporters apparent willingness to sweep the issue with the MEAP under the carpet and to continue chatting on about her misdemeanor charge.

Jordan Genso

8:28 pm on Saturday, December 10, 2011

It appears as though my hopes were wrong. Some people enjoy the warmth from the torch in their hand so much that they are still committed to the lynching, and will change their reasoning whenever needed. It's sad to watch, as they are embarrassing themselves and don't seem to realize it.

Reply
Comment_arrow

stephanie pytlowanyj

8:34 pm on Saturday, December 10, 2011

What's unfortunate is the "supporters" that can't exam facts without resorting to bullying tactics.

Neutral

10:57 am on Sunday, December 11, 2011

OK lets talk facts again nothing you say that Sahouri did seems out of line to me. I work in an industry that requires several audits each year. We prep, we debrief, we try to follow the auditors schedule but can't always. Every time they leave it costs us more in some way to do our jobs, new forms, new processes, new employees.
Not defending just pointing out some facts.
I don't think you are familiar wiht they ways of the world.

Reply
Comment_arrow

stephanie pytlowanyj

12:54 pm on Sunday, December 11, 2011

The point is the Michigan Department of Education has/had an issue with what Sahouri did, and they are the experts in their field of education investigations.
You can't compare apple to oranges; your industry audit to a MEAP violation investigation.
Finally, it's unfortunate Sahouri "supporters" can't exam facts without resorting to put downs, and bullying tactics.

hartland eagle

1:58 pm on Sunday, December 11, 2011

Clearly Stephanie has some kind of personal axe to grind with Sahouri, which is why she pursues this online vendetta.

The MEAP investigation says she opened the "top secret" MEAP documents early. So what? A staff member knew the writing prompt earlier than they should. So what? Did anyone coach the kids based on that information? No. No one's even suggested that. Again, so what?

Tracy is a caring, dedicated school administrator. The best in the district, and I've interacted with them all. We're very lucky to have her in the district.

Reply
Comment_arrow

stephanie pytlowanyj

6:42 pm on Sunday, December 11, 2011

Regarding your list of so what's, it doesn't matter if you discount Ms. Sahouri's actions, what matters is the Department of Education didn't. In addition, it's my understanding Ms. Sahouri's indiscretion is going to cost the school district $10,000.00 Is that 10,000 so what's to you Hartland Eagle?

Comment_arrow

hartland eagle

6:24 pm on Tuesday, December 13, 2011

Yes, that's a so what also. The district policy shares in the blame for the $10k expense - they were in violation and would have been subject to the fee without any of Tracy's actions. $10,000 out of a $45,000,000 budget. So what.

stephanie pytlowanyj

8:10 pm on Sunday, December 11, 2011

Michele,
it's my understanding the police present the evidence to the prosecuting attorney's office and that office makes the decision to prosecute or not.
Per a statement in the December 11, 2011 Tri County Times, the special assistant prosecutor, John Potbury stated, "After reviewing all the available evidence, we have determined we cannot sustain our burden of proof." I don't know what additional evidence Mr. Potbury is referencing but it ended the prosecution of the Sahouri's
The police and legal system did it's job, nothing more, nothing less.
Regarding your question about the involved minor, I read she was not prosecuted as she was deemed the victim in this situation.

Reply

stephanie pytlowanyj

3:17 pm on Monday, December 12, 2011

LOL, yes, I spend my hour's sharpening my ax waiting for the Hartland administration to do something else inappropriate.

Reply

Michele Gonzalez

3:27 pm on Monday, December 12, 2011

The VICTIM? ARE YOU KIDDING ME? The Sahouri's were the victims here.
Seems to me that the teenager has some very lacking critical thinking skills and poor judgement. Maybe that came from her parents? She hid alcohol and consumed it herself.

Reply
Comment_arrow

stephanie pytlowanyj

3:50 pm on Monday, December 12, 2011

Perhaps you could contact the special assistant prosecutor, John Potbury. Maybe he could better explain it.

dan rice

8:52 pm on Monday, December 12, 2011

Somebody appears to have a special agenda against Sifferman & Sahouri judging from the poison pen commentary.

FACT: drinking case was dismissed due to lack of evidence.
FACT: state conducted an audit of the MEAP handling and needed corrections are being implemented.

I haven't seen/heard of any evidence proving intentional wrong-doing. If evidence comes up otherwise, then appropriate action should be taken against the guilty party. The veiled sarcasm and supposition should be taken offline. It may seem fun & easy to roast someone from the safety of your keyboard, but both these individuals have strong long-term records and should be provided appropriate respect.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Kim

9:48 pm on Monday, December 12, 2011

Wish there was a like button on here. Agreed Dan. It actually has been proven in studies that people would not say the things they do in person as they do sitting behind the keyboard.

stephanie pytlowanyj

9:58 am on Tuesday, December 13, 2011

Mr. Rice,
apparently you haven't read the report written by the Michigan Department of Education. This report, in part, states teachers were afraid to broach concerns regarding the MEAP for fear of losing their employment (what a great work environment that must have been) Ms. Sahouri left the investigative staff waiting while Sahouri conducted "impromptu" meetings with "select" staff. Ms. Sahouri "compromised" the investigation by having the investigators conduct interviews in an office adjacent to her's. Ms. Sahouri personally escorted staff and didn't present them in the order as requested by the investigators. Ms. Sahouri "interrupted" several interviews and "debriefed" staff after meeting with investigators. She finally approached the investigators asking why certain questions were being asked.
There then is a list of 5 remediation items Creekside will have now have to follow.
I may be incorrect but I believe this will cost the school district $10,000.00
I can't respect behaviors that contributed to or condoned the above.

Unlike many posting in this thread, I can't support the decisions made by either Sahouri or Sifferman. If you don't like my opinion, there's always the delete key (I'll be using it). My opinion is unlike most that post here so that's why the call for censorship, the false accusations, and bullying tactics. If this is the majority, Hartland schools will not improve for the betterment of the children. What a sad commentary!

Reply

dan rice

11:30 am on Tuesday, December 13, 2011

Thank you Kim.

Think it's important to keep the big picture in mind here: Hartland school district is providing an excellent education to my kids and majority of the staff is caring and committed. One person monopolizing a message board with their own sour grapes doesn't make them representative of the community.

Reply

Neutral

8:32 pm on Thursday, December 15, 2011

Stephanie-So sorry you felt I was bullying you. That was not the case. I see tfrom the posts over and over again you assume that investigation equals guilt. Your logic is flawed I was taking a guess about the reason for the flawed logic.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Jordan Genso

9:04 pm on Thursday, December 15, 2011

While Stephanie may have felt you were using "bullying tactics", most of the people here recognize that her quickness in striking a martyr's pose everytime someone said something against her was simply an argumentative technique used to try and distract from her flawed logic.

Oops! Does that make me a "bully"?

Comment_arrow

Linda Bowen

4:59 pm on Monday, December 19, 2011

A bit late to the discussion, but I did want to respond to Neutral. I've learned that all too often in newspaper comment or forum debates, people take the position that disagreement or arguments against their position = bullying. As Jordan points out, it's usually a deflecting technique. It's sad, because not only does it cheapen and often end the debate (which is sometimes exactly what the one making the accusation intends) but it also makes light of the real and serious problem of bullying.

When this happens, I usually see is as a signal that the accuser is no longer capable of arguing in good faith.

DB

7:36 pm on Wednesday, December 21, 2011

Tracey Sahouri was a great educator way back in the 90's when she began her teaching career at Flushing. I loved working with her!! It is always interesting to me that some people jump on the gossip bandwagon and run and run and run... DB

Reply

Leave a comment