The Franklin Police Department has determined a Williamson County School Central Office criminal complaint against two Cool Springs area parents is unfounded.
The police report below is worth reading.
How did two women go from fighting for their children’s right to stay in their current school, to facing criminal allegations from the Central Office?
The Franklin Police Department has concluded the investigation of Jennifer Luteran and Kristen Richardson who were accused by Williamson County Schools violating Tennessee Code Annotated 39-16-301 and 39-16-303. These statutes relate to impersonating a government employee with intent to injure or defraud another person, and the offense of using a false identification for the purpose of obtaining goods, services or privileges to which the person is not otherwise entitled or eligible.
Mrs. Luteran and Mrs. Richardson are stay at home moms who have been part of group of parents concerned about the process that Central Office adopted in rezoning Williamson County students.
The Franklin police found the charges to be unfounded and without merit.
Transcribed copy of the police investigative report:
INVESTIGATIVE SUMMARY by Franklin TN Police Detective Andrew Green:
On Tuesday, December 21, 20H), Detective Green reviewed the case alleging Criminal Impersonation and Utilizing False Identification and read the attached emails provided to Officer Rich by Mr. Squires, one of the attorneys for the Williamson County School (WCS) system.
On Wednesday, December 22, 2010 at approximately 1830 hrs, Detective Green attempted to Contact Jennifer Luteran vía telephone, but was able only to leave a voice message for her.
On Monday, December 27, 2010 at approximately 2030 hrs, Detective Green contacted Kristen Richardson via telephone regarding the voice message she had for him on December 23, 2010. Richardson stated that it was she who had contacted Edulog, spoke with a representative, and identified herself as Kristen Richardson. Richardson stated she did this to learn the most expeditious method for WCS personnel to retrieve certain reports from the software system being employed by the WCS system. Richardson added she forwarded those instructions to Jennifer Luteran, who in turn then forwarded them to Bill Squires, Mike Looney, and Susan Parker for inspection and implementation. Richardson further stated that she believed it was very clear from the way she worded her requests, stated where she lived and that she had children in the system that she was not a member of the school board. Richardson added that at no time did she ever identify herself as an employee of the WCS, a representative of the WCS or otherwise intimate that she was affiliated with the WCS. Richardson stated she was in phone and email contact with an Edulog employee named Lisa Staschak who was able to answer her questions whether certain reports were able to be generated by the software being employed by WCS. Richardson further started Staschak responded via email to her (Richardson’s) personal home address, provided the protocol to employ to obtain the report, and even included a sample report which she generated as an example.
Richardson stated she contacted Edulog personally because she felt that she, Luteran, and others were nor being told the as to Whether certain reports could be generated and the time and effort required to do so. According to Richardson, she also felt that she, Luteran and the others were being put off rather than their request being taken seriously. Detective Green reviewed the emails provided by Squires, noted 2; missive sent by Allison Nunley “Routing Specialist” in her closing)to Joe O’Dell, a representative from Edulog. Detective Green observed Nunley refer to Luteran’s request that the WCS had been in possession of “. . .for some time. . .” as “. . .time consuming, etc, etc.. .” Detective Green noted there was no request in the communiqué from Nunley to O’Dell for a more efficient method to retrieve the data than the one she already possessed; no request for confirmation that the instructions supplied by Luteran were accurate; and no indication that she intended to furnish the report to Luteran; there was however a request to ascertain Whether or not Luteran had contacted Edulog.
Richardson further stated that she specified only statistical information be included in the report such as the number of children in a given grade in a given area, not anything such as dates of birth, social security numbers, or medical/physical conditions. Detective Green requested Richardson to forward copies of email Contact between her and Staschak if she still possessed them. Detective Green terminated the conversation with Richardson. Within a few minutes of making the request of Richardson, Detective Green received the emails. Detective Green has included printed copies of those emails in this report.
At approximately 2215 hrs, Detective Green was contacted vía telephone by Jennifer Luteran. Luteran stated she spoke with Richardson regarding her (Richardson’s) earlier conversation with Detective Green. Luteran provided a background similar to Richardson’s of how she became involved with the situation of investigating the rezoning of Williamson County schools. Luteran further stated that she did not receive the instructions which she forwarded to Squires, Looney and Parker from Edulog, but rather Richardson. Luteran further stated that she had initially sent an email request to Edulog’s technical support department for assistance With obtaining the aforementioned report. Luteran added that she included a report she received from a resident of another subdivision which contained similar information to that which she Was seeking. Luteran stated she asked if that particular report was derived from the Edulog software, Luteran stated she received an email in from Nate Dostal from the support department asking for a phone number to answer a few questions to help narrow the search and define exactly what was desired. Luteran further stated that in a follow up telephone conversation she had with Dostal, Dostal confirmed that the report she submitted to him was in fact an Edulog product and that the report she was requesting could absolutely be performed by the software program of which the WCS was in possession. According to Luteran,_Dostal stated he would contact the WCS and be a “facilitator” so that the requested reports could be generated. Luteran stated after that last contact with Dostal, he did not return further calls or emails. Detective Green requested the email contacts Luteran had with Dostal if she still possessed them. Luteran stated she would locate and forward the documents as she believed she still possessed them. Detective Green terminated the conversation with Luteran. Shortly after the conversation With Luteran, Detective Green received the email contacts between her and Dostal. Detective Green has included printed copies of those emails in this report.
On December 20, 2010, Detective Green contacted Edu1og’s office via telephone and spoke Joe O’Dell. O’Dell stated that his company did not record incoming or outgoing phone calls, so there was no record of what was said to whom during Richardson’s contact with the company. O’Dell further stated that even though Edulog’s policy is to verify the identity of the caller/requester, with some 1,200 client groups keeping track of all authorized personnel (determined by the client) becomes somewhat difficult. O’Dell agreed with Detective Green that it was possible and even likely, that by mentioning “Williamson County”, Staschak (who provided Richardson With the protocol to run) assumed Richardson worked for the WCS due to her statistical knowledge and use of terms such as “planning zones”, “boundary zones”, and “intermediate groups”. O’Dell stated that the software purchased from his company by the WCS was not a “Web based” program; that is, it cannot be accessed by anyone via an internet Connection, it must be accessed from dedicated hardware equipped with the proprietary software. Detective Green defined for O’Dell what “confidential” or “sensitive” information meant within the constraints of this investigation (dates of birth, social security numbers, medical conditions or restrictions, etc) and O’Dell stated that even with access to the system (which neither Richardson nor Luteran possessed) no sensitive information could have been mined the specified protocol. Further, O’Dell stated that nothing that Richardson did obtain from Edulog was “sensitive” as defined in this investigation. Detective Green mentioned Nate Dostal’s contact with Luteran and its abrupt cessation and asked if it was possible he was told not to have any further Contact with her. O’Dell stated that, “It may have been me that told him that.” O’Dell neither volunteered anything further as to why he did, if he was told to do so and if so, by whom, nor did Detective Green ask. Detective Green asked O’Dell if he had my questions and having none, Detective Green terminated the conversation.
On Tuesday, January 4, 2011, Detective Green contacted the 21st Judicial District Attorney (DA) Kim Helper via telephone, Detective Green detailed the findings of his investigation for DA Helper. DA Helper stated that her office would not be willing to prosecute this case with the existing set of facts and circumstances and then followed up with an email asserting the same belief Detective Green has included a printed copy of the email in this report.
CASE STATUS: Due to the fact that the statutory requirements of either TCA. 6-301 of 39-16-3013 have not been met, there is no crime. This case be UNFOUNDED.