ECNS, February 28 -- According to the U.S. Sing Tao Daily report, a Chinese female teacher who put a kitten in a bag causing its death admitted one charge of misconduct and thus was summoned to a hearing by the New York City Department of Education. Although she could keep her teaching position, she was fined $12,500. She appealed to the court, arguing that the fine was too heavy and the hearing process was unfair to her, requiring suspension of the relevant decision. However, due to insufficient reasons, the court did not accept it.
The appellant Liu Tianna (Tina Liu) was a lifelong teacher employed by the Department of Education and had been working for 15 years. In 2009, before being temporarily suspended, she taught at a high school in Queens with very good past teaching records. However, in September 2009, she put a kitten in a bag at home, and then the animal control agency took it away, only to find that the kitten had died. At that time, she also said, "Now I see what this country is like. I should have killed them all and not called anyone." Therefore, Liu Tianna was arrested in November. In March of the following year, she admitted one charge of misconduct.
In response to this incident, the New York City Department of Education held several hearings to discuss whether Liu Tianna violated the city's educational regulations and should be punished. The hearing lasted for six days in total, with multiple witnesses testifying successively. Liu Tianna also had legal representation. The Department of Education requested her dismissal, while Liu asked to return to her post without receiving any punishment. Finally, the hearing officer ruled part of the charges against Liu as established, fining her $12,500 deducted from her salary over 18 months.
Liu Tianna was dissatisfied with the ruling, believing that the fine was too heavy and lacked basis. The hearing officer was biased against her, and the process was also unfair to her. Therefore, she required the court to suspend the hearing's decision. However, the court believed that Liu Tianna had legal representation throughout the entire hearing process and had the opportunity to review all the evidence. Her lawyer also did not raise any questions about the hearing officer's bias. In fact, the entire hearing process was comprehensive and sufficient in duration, and the hearing officer's ruling was based on factual evidence.
According to the judgment, Liu Tianna's negligent behavior leading to the kitten's death did not constitute a reason for dismissal, but her statement of "killing them all" when arrested showed that she lacked sound judgment, which her job required rich knowledge and good judgment. Given her 15-year teaching record without any errors, the court did not accept the Department of Education's request for dismissal and instead imposed a fine as punishment. Therefore, the court upheld the hearing's ruling, and Liu Tianna's request was not accepted. (Author: Liao Guowen)