ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY, Md. (WJZ) — No graduation ceremony.  That’s the punishment for several Anne Arundel County students allegedly caught drinking on prom night.

Gigi Barnett reports parents and students say the punishment is too severe.

“They just don’t understand how hard it is to be a teenager and have something like that taken away from you,” said Aimee Liebman, 17.

Liebman paid more than $1,000 for her prom, including the dress, limo ride and tickets.  But when she and eight other Northeast High students arrived at Ravens Stadium last month, they were all kicked out.

“As soon as we got into prom, they were all accusing us of drinking,” Liebman said.

Zero tolerance punishment came swiftly: no prom, a three-day suspension from school and no senior or graduation ceremonies.

Liebman says about half of the students in the limo were drinking, but she didn’t.

“We had to sign a senior promise and because there were other people in the car who had drank and brought alcohol with them, I was guilty by association,” Liebman said.

What’s more, Liebman says school leaders didn’t follow their policy to call parents or police if a student is caught with alcohol at a school event and the principal didn’t have proof that she was drinking.

“There’s absolutely no proof except that someone said they smelled alcohol,” said her stepmother, Eileen O’Connor-Liebman.

Now, after a two-week battle and a slew of letters sent to school leaders, the school board is upholding the principal’s decision.

Anne Arundel County school leaders won’t discuss what happened on camera or their decision.

“I definitely have learned a life lesson because I can’t enjoy the memory of prom and enjoy the memory of my walk across the stage [at graduation],” Liebman said.

Wednesday in court, one of the eight students filed a restraining order against the school, asking the judge to temporarily stop all school events.  That would include graduation, which is Thursday night.

One of the other students took a Breathalyzer test that night.  It confirmed that she had not been drinking, but school leaders are barring that student from graduation as well.

Comments (154)
  1. lgrogan01 says:

    I will tell you now, if they stop the graduation ceremonies at Northeast tomorrow and my daughter does not get to walk across the stage I will be suing the parents of these kids who could not for one nigt obey school policy! Northeast specifically told all senior students and it was printed on the back of their prom tickets what would happen if there was ANY involvement with alchohol the night of the prom. These parents should be ticked off at their kids for trying to pull a fast one, not the school for upholding their policy! It’s time these parents and kids learn their lessons. They are heading out into the “real” world now and they need to know that breaking the rules is not tolerated. Hats off to Northeast and Dr. Kubic!

    1. zip says:

      I’m all for stopping the graduation ceremony to allow the court to figure this out! I believe in the no alcohol tolerance policy, I just disagree with storm trooper administrators acting before knowing the facts.

      1. Jim says:

        Hear hear, Zip!

      2. alec says:

        i like this guy from

        sincerely, bunny scar

    2. Jim says:

      Of course, you’re making the same assumption the administrators made, in that you’re assuming all the kids were guilty of what the administrator accused them of. What’s shocking in this is how many people want to burn these kids even though the administration cannot offer any sort of real proof the kids violated school policy.

      Instead of getting mad at the parents, maybe your ire should be directed at the administration who showed what’s looks to be some pretty bad judgment.

    3. hugsM says:

      I’m not sympathetic. If my child (I currently have a 17 yr old daughter at Old Mill and a 10 yr old son at Rippling Woods) were in the car with ANYONE who was drinking. I would expect my child to remove herself from the situation, hopefully by calling me or another trusted adult. This young lady should not have been around the alcohol at all. She was putting herself in a precarious and illegal situation and as such, should be held responsible. If she were my child, I certainly would not fight the school on this. She is responsible for the situation she is in, whether she actually drank the alcohol or not…she was there and she was a participant by association without proper response to the illegal behavior.

      1. Jim says:

        What if they got out of the car as soon as it became possible? Or would you have your child leap from a moving car?

        Yours is a simplistic, accusatory view.

      2. Jim says:

        BTW — it would appear that the way this went down, it wouldn’t have mattered if your child acted as you suggest, as the school administrators decided that simply being in the limo at some point was enough to constitute a violation of the school’s policy.

      3. brenda walsh says:

        I have to think you’d be singing a different tune if YOU weren’t going to see YOUR kid walking on graduation.

      4. Yolanda says:

        I agree with you!! A tough lesson for those kids to learn, but one they will remember and hopefully not repeat as an adult!!!

      5. Jim says:

        That’s right, Yolanda! The lesson is the state can do whatever they want to you whether or not the have evidence to back up their allegations or not. The lesson is don’t disobey the State!

      6. kathryn says:

        I don’t have children but I was once a high school senior in Anne Arundel County- and I remember signing the promise not to drink. We signed it and we all knew there were consequences. If drinking was something those students wanted to do, they could have skipped prom and drank instead. They knew the consequences and even those who were not drinking but “guilty by association” – they were aware of the rule and the consequence. Graduating from high school means you’re an adult and can make decisions for yourself. Clearly those students cannot do that and they do not deserve to walk across the stage. The parents of those students can take that time to speak with their children about alcohol and its consequences. The real world has consequences too and maybe this is a good place to learn that so they end up missing graduation instead of in jail. Underage drinking is a PROBLEM and I’m glad the school system is standing behind their decisions.

    4. Cassie Vera Alt says:

      HOWEVER, you can NOT control other people. She paid for her part of the limo and she had no choice but to share the car and then get punishedbecause of that. Seems unfair to me. Punish those that had th alcohol not the ones that actually said NO! Seems totally unfair to those that actualy did nothing to be punished for! And any adult can say, “I smell alcohol on you” jus because they have a vindictive attitude. I am 32 and I KNOW what that girl is going through. That is an unfair punishment

  2. Kenneth Baker says:

    What an idiot that is that left the comment above me. If you read the article it says she was not drinking and even took a breathalizer. Its idiots and parents like you that make the U.S. the way it is. Let the kids be kids, no prom and suspension was enough, Northeast is a crooked school with a crooked principle….

    1. Sheila McGrath says:

      I always told my kids if you lay down with dogs you get fleas. Guess she got the fleas.

      1. sheriff says:

        Sheila, Yeah & fleas last a lot longer than a hangover & leave bite scars.

      2. Jim says:

        Too bad you didn’t tell your children they theoretically live in a country where one is innocent until proven guilty, and that government officials can’t just do whatever they feel like, that they must be able to prove their allegations.

      3. zip says:

        Interesting note based on the school board testimony was that every one of the girls in the Limo was an honor student! Sometimes the dogs are gold medal winners. I don’t know these girls well, but no matter what, they are all sure move on the better things.

    2. Sarah says:

      You obviously did not read the article too well either! This girl did not take a breathalyzer test, it was a different, student. Letting kids be kids is the reason that students pull out knives on their teachers and that guns are being brought to school. My mother is a teacher in AACo and I fear for her going to work because of these kids that have been raised by people like you! These kids are about to be adults and need to be held accountable for their actions. That is the reason the US is the way it is, too many people feel entitled.

      1. Cassie Vera Alt says:

        What actions are they being held accountable for? Riding in a limo???? Seriously she was not drinking so how can you possibly punish someone for SOMEONE ELSE’S actions??? You want to be held accountable if police find drugs in your kids room and you go to prison for it? Seem fair to you!?

      2. A Voice says:

        Actually Cassie, you can. If you are in close proximity to someone with drugs, you can be held accountable.

      3. A Voice says:

        Let me expand on my comment before people run away with it. You can be held accountable for willingly being in proximity to a person with drugs (ie. your friend has pot in the car and you’re in the car with them. Cop pulls your friend over, you can be held accountable too). This is the same if you were with your friend at a store and your friend shop lifts. You’re with the friend, you can get in trouble too. Same thing applies in this case. Drinking was suspected of going on in the limo, everyone is supposed to be held accountable and everyone should have been. I agree the girl who gave up the others should also have had the same punishment. However, I can’t have sympathy for the others. Sorry, it might be harsh but that’s the truth. And yes, I would say the same thing if it was my child I wasn’t going to see walk. I would be angry beyond words- but with my child who knew the rules, not the school.

  3. keith says:

    i went to meade in aa county, graduated in 82. our sr class president did the same thing and watched graduation from the bleachers. the ploicy hasnt changed since then and THAT IS GODD!! these kids were committing an ILLEGAL act during a school function. break the rules and pay the price. if the school reconsiders, what does that say to all the kids who DID follow the rules AND obeyed the LAW???

    1. Jim says:

      No — these kids were accused of committing an illegal act. Sadly, through the public hearing it became pretty evident that the administrators didn’t have anything beyond an assumption to back up the allegation. More discouraging, several kids are going to be sacrificed so the school administration isn’t put in a worse light than it already is.

      It’s shocking to me more people aren’t up in arms about the incredibly bad judgment displayed by the school staff during all this.

    2. Cassie Vera Alt says:

      The article is about the kids that DID NOT drink! They were guilty merely by being in the same limo that they PAID FOR! That is UNFAIR!

      1. baltimore resident says:

        So Cassie you were there and have proof positive she wasn’t drinking? Jails are full of the so called innocent people who said it wasn’t me, if they had been stopped and found drugs in the car they all would have been charged with possession, if someone had committed a robbery they all would have arrested and charged, so the feeling is she was there, couldn’t prove she didn’t they smelled the alcohol so bingo she gets the charge plain and simple.

    3. Auth says:

      Your brain beveelis that you need alcohol and you have actually become physically dependent on it at this point. The detox the hospital gave you only fixed your body, but your mind was not accepting the change. You viewed the hospital with anger because you were deprived of a chemical that your body adapted to.If you don’t stop drinking, drinking will stop you. I know you want to stop by yourself, but if you could do that, you would have succeeded already.If you think you are strong enough and have enough willpower, try this:Measure the least amount of alcohol you need today. Make this your starting amount. Only allow this amount into your house at one time. Reduce this amount each day by one tablespoon or by a certain measurement. Be precise. Do this reduction every day or every few days until you are at zero.During this period of reduction, you need to do some emotional work. Keep a diary of how you feel. Realize that you are doing this for your health. You are being proactive. Don’t blame yourself or feel defeated feel proud that you are trying to help yourself.If this doesn’t work, you will need professional help. However, AA can be very helpful. I recently started attending meetings with my boyfriend. He needed help, and I am supporting his recovery. The meetings helped me too, because they are full of regular people who don’t judge. No one will know if you go to meetings in another town. Just try one and you will see that the people there can really help. Good luck I am praying for you.

  4. Herman Glimsher says:



    1. Can't Fix Stupid says:

      Mr. Glimsher, I can tell you are from this area…are you always SO ANGRY?

    2. lucyjhall says:

      Perhaps the breathalyzer was administered after the students had already had time to sober up. It takes a considerable amount of time to notify parents of the drinking incident, wait for parents to arrive, and allow the parents to order a breathalyzer to be administered. Besides, there are a number of *facts* mentioned above that are not correct. It saddens me that new stations get away with printing such unfounded nonsense. Hats off to the parents who stand behind school policy and who teach their children to be responsible for their actions! Hats off to those students who acted appropriately and can now enjoy the last remaining days of their senior year! Thank you to the principal for enforcing the rules, and thank you to the board for upholding her decision. It is nice to see that some accountability still exists within the school system.

      1. zip says:

        Not so, in testimony, the blood test was taken approx two hours after the girl was accused of drinking. Not enough time to sober up the blood. School policy should be supported, but there should be proof of the violation. In this case, there was no proof other than the assumption. Remember, the one girl who was first reported as very drunk, was the one who named the other kids in order to be let go.

      2. baltimore resident says:

        Perhaps the breathalyzer was administered after the students had already had time to sober up
        very intelligent thought finally someone not taking a 17 year olds word as gospel

    3. hmmmm says:


      1. Cassie Vera Alt says:

        How can you be so sure your kid won’t do it? Seriously you think you are such a great parent because your kid possibly WON’T drink you are funny. And obviously don’t remember being a teenager. And you seem like such a nice kind person calling everyone morons because we think that if the weren’t drining they shouldn’t be punished. THose that were drinking are the ones that should be punished not punished by assosiaction. That’s dumb! I do hope your daughter never does anything like this but I doubt it will be because you are such a SUBERB parent!

    4. zip says:

      and that is the lesson this school sysytem has allowed to be taught! Never mind about the proof or the facts! Let’s base everything on assumption of guilt! When you assume, then the policy and rules you as a school system so dearly preach about and hope the children learn go out the window!

  5. Dan says:

    First off Mr. Baker where did you go to school because you cannot even spell “principal” right. The AACPS policy, which is gone over, read to them, and then even signed by the students is clear cut. No student is to have any association with alcohol in the last four weeks of the school year. Regardless of what type of contact with alcohol they had,I am sorry to say that these students are guilty by association and they need to accept the consequences of their actions. All seniors in AACPS know the policy regarding alcohol and these students rolled the dice and they lost. The problem with the US Mr. Baker is you and the parents who believe that it is okay for these students to have committed an illegal act by driking or being in possession of alcohol under the age of 21. I feel sorry for the parents of these children who are saying that the school system is at fault and not them for failing as parents or their children for breaking the law. I applaud lgrogan01 for being a parent and you should sue the parents of these children for wrecking your daughters special day. Kudos to AACPS officials for holding their ground and making the students accountable for their actions for once.

    1. Can't Fix Stupid says:

      Very well said Dan. I guess we were writing our comments at the same time. The parents won’t hold the kids responsible because they (or an older sibling) are the ones buying the booze!

      1. zip says:

        Nice assumption, but then again, like you said, you can’t fix stupid! I’m guessing you see these parents buy booze for the kids! If so, doesn’t that make you guilty too! Hmmm, think before you speak, but then again, you can’t fix stupid!

  6. Can't Fix Stupid says:

    It doesn’t surprise me that this happened in the Pasadena area. I work in a liquor store an it really surprises me the number of parents in this area that buy alcohol for their underage kids. I’ve also never seen an area drink as much as this. It’s no wonder the next generation has already started. Just about everytime you hear of a death from a car accident in this area, I recognize the name…so very sad.

    1. Cassie Vera Alt says:

      Therefore you should be also held accountable since you watched and SOLD the alcohol to the parents knowing they were buying it for the kids. . . . You are right can’t fix stupid.

      1. baltimore resident says:

        can’t blame the seller if it was sold to an adult what happens after it leaves the store is not their problem, but since you are so fired up about this you must be one of the students involved, if you are get over it, if not too bad your kid is wrong.

      2. Can't Fix Stupid says:

        Cassie Vera Alt, believe me, if I could get away with not selling the booze to these “parents” I wouldn’t. This weekend was a big graduation weekend. Same thing. Why do you need booze for a high school graduation? So you can keep your a$$hold comments to yourself white trash! You are right, I can’t fix stupid or you would have been fixed a long time ago!

  7. Aunt Sheila says:

    Your are an idiot – you obviously didn’t read the article where it states that a few of the students didn’t drink – I am not surprised with your comment about suing given where you live & obviously you are of THAT caliber! however, the wonderful pincipal that you speak of – BULLIED the students & didn’t even call their parents – she knew she was wrong or she would have & even more importanly SHOULD have called the police to the scene if there truly was something ILLEGAL going on. So maybe you should just keep your comments to yourself when you obviously don’t know what you are talking about!!

    1. Dan says:

      Were you actually there or are you just taking the word of these students. Maybe you should keep your comments to yourself unless you have first hand knowledge of what happened.

      1. Aunt Sheila says:

        As a matter of FACT I do have 1st hand knowledge of what happened! While some of the students were being BULLIED BY THE PRINCIPAL into writing statements – others were actually not guilty of drinking & called their parents – some of those parents took their kids to the police station & even the emergency room to prove they had not been drinking. The PRINCIPAL should have called the police to protect those that were actually drinking so that not only they would get home safely but also others that were in the immediate areal – that should have been what she did instead of without proper training of any kind – walking around smelling students breathe to determine guilt or innocense – & if you attended the AA school board meeting concerning this matter last Wednesday you might understand the discrepancies in the story that the school is telling!!!!!!

    2. lgrogan01 says:

      Aunt Shiela-
      you are the ignorant one, my child followed the rules set forth by the Board of Education, she did not drink or have anything to do with drinking that night so she was allowed to enter the prom and she is graduating tomorrow with her class. As for your un-educated comments about the type of person I am, it looks to me that I have raised a duaghter who obeys the laws and rules that are put forth to her and I am very proud of that. If these kids did not drink thats great however, they knoew that there should not have been any alcohol in the limo, so they should have asked the one’s who brought it to leave it or find another ride. They knew the consequences and knew what would happen, and it did, so now everyone wants to cry foul. It is just like the guy who drives the hold up man away from the scene iof the crime, when he gets cught he says “Judge, I am so sorry, I didn’t know what he was going to do” and the judge says too bad, guilt by association. Pick better friends.

      1. zip says:

        How quick lgrogan01 to assume there was alcohol in the Limo. according to testimony, they found a bottle they thought may contain a clear substance that may have had a slight smell of alcohol or was it perfume or hair spray? Hmmm. they are not sure, because Ms. Kubic according to her own testimony, is not sure what happened to the bottle. When asked if the bottle contained alcohol, the return statement was it was a clear liquid that looked like alcohol. Hmmm, water in a water bottle is a clear liquid? I’m assuming you would not know about the testimony considering you were not present!

      2. AUNT SHEILA says:


    3. ray says:

      That is absolute nonsense. She most certainly called the parents. Ridiculous. And resorting to personal attacks based on where a person lives is also ridiculous. Clearly, you don’t know what you’re talking about.

      1. zip says:

        Ray, true about attacks relating to where a person lives. Untrue about Ms. Kubic calling the parents. According to her own testimony, she did not call all the parents as she was overwhelmed with 300 students attending the prom and was trying to figure out the where the alcohol smell was coming from

      2. ray says:

        She didn’t call the parents initially because she is responsible for the entire student body and, yes, she cannot neglect the other 300 kids in order to focus on several that have violated school and county rules. The parents were contacted as soon as administration understood which students were involved and what exactly had happened prior to the event. Unfortunately, the principal can’t drop everything to tend to a select group of children. In the event that other students had arrived intoxicated (which they did not), Dr. Kubic would be responsible for dealing with them as well. I like EH’s comment that we should focus on the accomplishments of the other seniors on their graduation day. It’s unfortunate that some students will miss out on a momentous day, but all of this attention being given to several students who made a mistake just undermines the importance of graduation day for the other kids.

  8. pigeon says:

    Liebman says about half of the students in the limo were drinking, but she didn’t; “guilty by association” says it all.
    They signed an “agreement” and didn’t stick to it. Hard lesson to learn!

    1. zip says:

      but according to testimony, all students signed the agreement, as do all seniors. But not all the students who were in the Limo were accused of drinking. One student who was reported that evening to be extremely drunk, but was in the Limo is allowed to walk in exchange for her naming the people in the limo. SO much for guilt by association. Seems I saw a photo of that girl sitting in between two girls who are not being allowed to walk! What again is the definition of guilt by association.

    2. Joyse says:

      I’m with you pigeon, she should have known better. Let the reat of the students, who follow the rules, have their cremony and graduation day.

      1. Delia says:

        SeanChapin1 on June 24, 2011 I have tears welling up wcinhtag this one of the best It Gets Better videos out there. Thank you for putting so much dedication into this video, I believe it will change lives for the better.

    3. zip says:

      True! Guiklt by association is a hard lesson to learn!

  9. Lauri Seybuck says:

    My niece was in that limo and was not a part of the drinking. Alcohol was brought by a few of the students in the limo and was not consumed by everyone. The only lesson my niece learned is that the school system apparently does not have to abide by the premise “innocent until proven guilty”. The evidence (and I use that term loosely) was to have them blow in the principal’s face to determine whether or not they had been drinking. My niece had already been in the prom for 30 minutes and consumed a full plate of nachos. I don’t believe an authority trained in alcohol detection let alone the principal would have the ability to discern an alcohol smell after the consumption of what my niece had to eat. The principal even rejected a breathalyzer test administered by a police station that was taken by one of the students. What really is unconscionable is the fact that these students are not even allowed to attend the graduation ceremony to see their friends or family graduate. My daughters are also graduating but my niece will not be able to watch her cousins get their diploma because she is not allowed on the premises. It is one thing to be denied participation in your graduation but to strip these kids of the right to watch their friends and family graduate serves absolutely no purpose other than to add insult to injury. That is just cruel.

    1. sheriff says:

      Lauri, Guilt by association, you can’t have it both ways. She should have called her parents & got out of the Limo.

    2. alec says:

      i like this lady to fyi this is ur sisters son

    3. baltimore resident says:

      BOO HOO have some cheese with that whine

      1. zip says:

        I enjoy the intelligent conversation!

  10. zip says:

    I agree with the guilt by association pigeon, but one girl who was in the limo, will be at the ceremony, guilt by association does not take sides. What was good for one, should be good for all, unless of course, you offer your testimony in exchange for a free ride across the stage. As for Can’t Fix Stupid, you are right. Look at your comments and ask yourself if you can fix them. You make some assumptions as did the board and Ms. Kubic.

  11. zip says:

    I was in the board meeting the night the students had the chance to address the school board regarding the drinking accusations. The meeting was presented to the girls as a place where they could state what happened at the prom. What it turned out to be was a rhetorical fest by the administration explaining what the school policies were with little or no proof of students drinking with relation to the prom. It was a short notice meeting where the students had almost no chance at due process and have legal representation due to a last minute scheduled meeting. The school administrators spent most of the time addressing the school policy and not addressing the real issue of who if any of the students had been drinking. To address lgrogan01, who I’m sure was not at the board meeting, I agree with you on one point regarding the punishment if students were caught drinking. The fact is, Ms. Kubic never said any of the students were caught with alcohol or had been drinking. What she said in testimony was that someone had passed around a bottle and she assumed it was alcohol and therefore assumed the students had been drinking. Neither the bottle was brought into evidence to prove there was alcohol in it, nor was there anything to prove that any student had come into contact with alcohol. So, your comments and thought process is invalid lgrogan01. So, according to Ms. Kubic’s own testimony, all contact with alcohol was assumed and never proven. Hmmm, I don’t believe assumption holds up in a court of law very well.

    1. Larry says:

      Zip- If you listen to the video the the news made with this girl and her step mom you will hear the stepmom admit that there was alcohol in the limo and that half of the kids were drinking. The school now does not have to prove any point because they just proved it for them.

      1. zip says:

        I understand Larry, but I was in the boardroom that evening. both her and her family told a different story that evening. She did say she was not drinking, but she also said she didn’t see anyone else drinking in the limo. It is now hear-say, every girl for themselves. That is hard to prove. My argument is that the Ms. Kubic never was able to prove anyone was drinking outside of the one boy who admitted he brought the water bottle. I agree with the policy and believe those who violate the policy should be held accountable. But show me the proof. In this case, as a journalist, covering the story, I did not hear the proof, just assumptions and Ms Kubic thinking she smelled alcohol based on hearsay.

      2. Aarti says:

        Jeff, great post! I dtfinieely didn’t get the same meaning out of the tweet that you did, at least initially. Part of the reason is that I saw an earlier tweet with the end reading because I want them to do better than I did . I can’t attribute this to anyone, but I think the distinction is important. Although the word better is still problematic, I think behavior is perhaps something more manageable than say, personality or identity. Your first and last points were of more concern to me. Though I didn’t see it from the over-running the student angle, I was more concerned with the concept that we might lose ourselves in our efforts to help students. I think we can often invest so much of who we are in our students that we can over-identify. Great conversation starter here. I think I’m going to go with your thought that the intention was different than it came across.

  12. zip says:

    Dan is correct with his comment about association with alcohol. But like lgrogan01, I don’t think he was in the boardroom that evening either! Ms. Kubic nor any of the school administrators were able to prove that consumption or even minimum contact with any amount of alcohol had taken place, yet the board, in defense of it’s policy and without proof, decided not to embarrass administrators and side with the no proof and assumption testimony by the administrators. Ms. Kubic on more than occasion admitted that she assumed the girls had drank simply by passing the bottle. She went on to say that what she meant by the term “pass the bottle” was they had drank from the bottle. Again, she did not see the bottle, or anyone drink from it, only assumed based on testimony from a third party who stated he passed a bottle, but never stated it was a bottle of alcohol. Another witness, Ms. Chessil Johnson, Vice Principal, stated in testimony that she was tasked by Ms. Kubic to find kids who had been drinking, but went on to testify that there were more than 300 kids in the prom and she was not really paying attention to what she was doing and assumed the kids she stopped may have been drinking because she thought she smelled alcohol. Again, not the type of testimony that would hold up in court. Ms. Kubic also admitted in testimony that an elevator door opened with between 15 and 20 people in the elevator. She stated that she smelled alcohol and that she couldn’t stop all the kids so she grabbed the first four and had them breath on her. She also stated that she did not stop the other 16 or so students in the same elevator because she was overwhelmed by the amount of people coming into the prom. It is sad to see Dan so quick to assume these girls are guilty and so willing to sue, especially when he was not at the prom or the board meeting! Good job Dan, next time show up! He, like Ms. Kubic, made assumptions with no physical proof.

    1. E.H. says:

      Yes, some students may have been able to step off the elevator, but they had to immediately walk to the front table to check in and drop off tickets, and–wouldn’t you know it!–there were at least eight other teachers and/or administrators with whom the students had to come into contact. Any students who filtered past the principal had to get past a slew of other adults, so let’s not make it sound like the kids were home free after evading the principal. Additionally, the fact that several students admitted to the drinking that took place en route to the event clearly negates any need for “hard evidence.” The students are not supposed to engage in any activity involving alcohol. The policy is very clear, and to students were made aware of that policy time and time again. Yes, it’s sad that these kids will miss an important event in their lives. Yes, they made a silly mistake — whether it was drinking or choosing to be with people who were drinking. But the bottom line is that they broke the rules. Other students who attended that night did not. Perhaps the focus should be on celebrating those other kids.

      1. zip says:

        Nice comments E.H, and you are right, about there being other teachers being there. But that is not what Ms Kubic stated to the board. Once she stated she was overwhelmed! Hmmmm Interesting!! She stated that she was the one who had to determine where the smell was coming from, and that she grabbed the first four off the elevator and the rest continued. She also stated that she assumed there was drinking in the limo because the boy told her he had passed a bottle around. Never did she say she was told there was drinking in the limo. only that the bottle was passed around and that she assumed passing around meant drinking! Check the transcript. I’m not basing my info on other written statements, but rather the spoken words of the principal. I don’t argue the accomplishments of the other graduating students but like Ms. Kubic you assume that they were not drinking. That assumption is just as wrong as assuming that some are. I also don’t dispute the policy, just the inability of Ms. Kubic to present anything other than assumption and hearsay to the board. The board is not a court of law and is not expected to change the ruling of their school administrators. This case is best left to court of law and jury. Like I said, I don’t dispute or challenge the school policy, just that a professional high school administrator would fill her testimony with assumptions. It doesn’t say much for what is being taught these days. She often mentioned Due Process, but in reality, is not sure whet she was talking about. She has a lot to learn. I hope she takes this lesson, learn from it and share with future students. She won’t always have a school board to cover her embarrassing testimony!

  13. Don't Assume says:

    It honestly disgusts me how most of you (SUPPOSED ADULTS) are so immature and ignorant. NONE OF YOU WERE THERE. & Mrs.Grogan, please grow up and stop starting arguments with teenage girls on facebook. Only the people involved know the details of the case and what you hear is JUST THAT. It’s only words, anyone can say anything. & while we are all entitled to opinions, try seeing all sides and actually knowing what happened before you run your mouth. Thanks.

    1. zip says:

      Good comment! and yes, I was there! Both when the girls entered the limo and at the board meeting. The assumptions made at the board meeting would not be too convincing in a court of law! But that is another chapter!

  14. Limo Company says:

    Well we have heard from the parents, the students in the limo, and other concerned parents of students at this school. So, now lets hear from the actual limo company involved in this situation.
    After speaking in depth with out employee who was driving these students, I can state for a fact that there was alcohol brought into the limo by the students. Our company policy states that we do NOT provide alcohol for minors, our driver was made aware of the alcohol after the students in question started passing around a bottle of alcohol. Were all of the students drinking, no, but they also did not ask the other students not to. Should our driver have stopped the limo and requested that the alcohol be thrown out, yes, and we are dealing with that situation. I am very sorry for all of the students and parents involved in this, however, I want to state that talking ugly, calling names, and other offensive things that are being done on this comment section towards the parents of the students that did do what they were supposed to is wrong and you are just projecting the blame. Maybe we can all learn a lesson from this. Thank You.

    1. zip says:

      Interesting comments, but testimony at the board meeting stated that the limo driver knew nothing of the drinking before he was told by a member of Ms. Kubics staff. it was also stated in testimony that the water bottle was empty and may have smelled of alcohol. Another part of testimony, stated that the bottle was not found in the limo, but rather in a garbage can and assumed it may have come from the limo. Interesting — what is the truth? At no time during the testimony was it stated that the driver knew there was drinking.

      1. sheriff says:

        Who gives a fat rat’s a$$ about what i OR ANY OF YOU HAVE TO SAY ABout this episode. The rules were broken & here is the punishment. End of story & good on you Mr/ Mrs Principal.

    2. sheriff says:

      Limo co exec. is CYA that’s all you need to know. Driver should have stopped the limo, made a call & have the parents come get their little s…..t kids.

  15. Samantha says:

    Good for the school board for sticking to the LAW and their policies. These students shouldn’t have brought alcohol to the event. Prom can be fun without drinking, which is by the way illegal. They can have fun tomorrow sitting at home and thinking about the consequences of their actions. I applaud this and don’t feel an ounce of sympathy for any of these students.

  16. zip says:

    True about the Law and Policy Samantha, but did you see how fast you assumed these students brought alcohol to the event. When in fact, they were not accused of bring alcohol to the event, but consuming prior to the event. See how quickly you convicted these girls without proof. Imagine now who quick and easy it was for Ms. Kubic and her staff to convict these girls based on hearsay from one student who may have been pressured to not graduate or be arrested unless they gave up names. The may be guilty, but let’s not convict them with assumption and hearsay. She me the facts. After all, are we not allowed the presumption of innocence before proof of guilt! Last I checked, this was still the United States!

    1. lucyjhall says:

      The students are not permitted to consume alcohol prior to the event either (or ever, since they’re not 21). It’s not hearsay when several students admit to it. It sucks for these few students that they made a poor choice, but they did, and it’s absurd to keep denying it. And thanks to the NHS senior who posted below. Congrats on your graduation!

    2. Samantha says:

      This is a school, which can choose to do with its policies what they want to. They don’t have to have hard evidence to do what they do. It’s not the law, it’s a school ground. Alcohol consumption is not allowed at school events. Being drunk is not allowed at school events. She said there were people drinking, that right there is proof enough. Again, they can have fun sitting at home today while the GOOD students graduate on the stage. Their parents should be ashamed of their kids, not creating a big deal about FAIR consequences and trying to ruin the GOOD students graduation.

      1. Getitstraight says:

        Samantha, As stated by many people, there is no proof that all students were drinking…and obviously you have never had children. No parent should ever be ashamed of their child,,, they can be disappointed, but still stand behind their family. You should grow up and realize…your no better than anyone else…..just luckier at most. I do not want to hear the GOOD and BAD….Many of those girls achieved much more then most of their peers ever had…Many high school students do so many more things….they just get to graduate because its not a week before prom…I only hope you grow up to have children that will make you ashamed…because guess what….the parents that act like their kids never do anything…usually have the worst ones…

  17. Nhs senior says:

    I was at the prom, the limo driver is the one who found the alcohol. I understand there madddd about not getting to walk across stager but this attention and lies are not needed the girls were drunk, and the breathalyzer wasnt given because they all would’ve had time to sober up.

    1. zip says:

      Nhs senior – yes you are almost right. The Limo driver did find a bottle, but somehow the staff didn’t think it was important enough to keep so it came up missing. It was assumed that there was as smell of alcohol coming from the bottle, but without a test, nobody could be sure. Strange how the bottle was not introduced as evidence at the board meeting. There was never proof that the girls were drunk or that the girls had consumed any alcohol. As for the breathalyzer, that did not happen. The test was a blood test. and no you cannot sober up in a couple hours to beat a blood test. According to testimony at the meeting, the affidavit stated that measureable alcohol can be detected for up to 24 hours after consumption. But the principal refused the test results because the school had not made the request. It’s okay to be madd about not walking, but the poing many miss is that they were convicted on assumption adn hearsay.

  18. A Voice says:

    I applaud the school for upholding policy! Zero tolerance means zero tolerance. The minute you start poking holes in a policy and saying “ok, we’ll follow it in this case but not this one and this one”, the policy becomes unenforceable. I’m sorry for those who are not going to walk but better decisions should have been made such as saying “Please put that away. I don’t think its fair that we be punished because you feel you can’t have fun without drinking” Yes, I understand peer pressure and no, I have not forgotten what it was like to be a teenager. However, this behavior should not be encouraged in any way. I don’t know about the student who is going to be allowed to walk for giving up peoples’ names. I do think that student should be punished as well. The facts remain, though, that all the students were in a location where drinking was occurring. I know at the school where I work that counts under our zero tolerance policy students sign before going to prom. And remember, this is not some obscure policy that the administration hid from the students. The students were fully aware that what they were doing was illegal and they knew the consequences. Tough luck for them!

    1. zip says:

      You are right about the policy A Voice, but you missed the point just as the school board did. You make assumptions that all took part in the alleged drinking and that nobody voiced their opinion and stated as you say, “Please put that away.” That may have happened, but I’m not sure because I, like you, was not in the Limo and can’t make assumptions without valid proof. My argument is not against the policy, as I believe in them. My argument is against the fact that the administration and school board quickly jumped to conclusion that all the kids in the Limo were guilty by association and not allowed to walk. But then again, one girl supposedly admitted to drinking, but would provide the names of all the girls in the Limo in return for immunity. What happened to “Guilt by Association”? It is not about the policy but about the proof that the policy was broken. That was never proven in the board meeting, but in a rush to cover up the many assumption mistakes made that evening by Ms. Kubic and her staff, decided to uphold her assumption rather than overturn an administration mistake. But then again, the school board is not a court of law and they are not required to act as such. This case hopefully will play out in a real court of law.

      1. A Voice says:

        Unfortunately suspicion is enough for this policy to be upheld. I know it is at my school anyway and I imagine for Northeast as well. Anyone SUSPECTED of drinking will be held to the policy. These students were suspected of drinking, whether they were or not, and so the school acted. Will this old up in a court of law without further proof? Probably not but I imagine the school is conducting their own investigation and could find further proof. I don’t agree with some students being allowed to walk while others are punished as I already stated in my comment. Everyone should be held to the same standard. On the other hand, I don’t think the whole issue should be dismissed. We’ll see how it plays out but as many other comments have mentioned, you are judged by the company you keep. And sadly for anyone in the limo who chose not to drink, they will still be judged based on the people they were with.

      2. ETOL says:


        I agree with everyhting you have stated thus far, I too was in the hearing and I was astonished with statements made by Principal Kubic and her administrators. Your statement “That was never proven in the board meeting, but in a rush to cover up the many assumption mistakes made that evening by Ms. Kubic and her staff, decided to uphold her assumption rather than overturn an administration mistake.” Could not be a more true statement. Regardless of all the he said / she said, they did not prove in any legal way or process that the students were drinking. They dont even have the evidence, which they could not produce in the hearing. I am just very dissappointed that the school board lives by the motto do as I say not as I do. I believe a civil case is going to be the only way true justice will be achieved.

  19. sheriff says:

    Ok you little s……t’s that have been given evertthing in life thus far & coddled by Mommy & Daddy. Wake up & welcome to the world of reality where disappointment runs deep & wide. The little liar who said she wasn’t drinking made me laugh. Her story was about as creative as the original Adam & Eve in the garden B.S. Northeast H.S. is a s…..t hole also. My daughter in law worked there as a teacher & the stories she can tell about that place. Anyway, have a good life kids & suck it up as it get’s a lot tougher here on out.

    1. zip says:

      Very sad take on life sherrif! How quick to defend the school and board on one hand and then how quickly you case a stone yourself. See how easy it is to convict on assumption and hearsay. And I doubt you have the same educational background as the school administration.

    2. Jim says:

      You sound like you’re interested in vengeance against a group, not seeing that justice is served.

      1. sheriff says:

        Justice, Justice??? It’s always about justice but on the way it forever get’s skewered. You get Justice when you’re Donald Trump or if you make it to Heaven’s gate. Don’t be such a silly little fool.

      2. Jim says:

        Yes, Sheriff — using highly emotive language and insulting people through the wonders of internet courage really helps make your point. LOL!

  20. zip says:

    Good call sheriff! We should all assume guilt of everyone without proof. Never mind the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, both of which are taught at the high school level. Or are they? Like I said, I don’t dispute the rules, but dispute guilt was imposed on hearsay and assumptions without actual proof. Your comments are sad and proof that this country is slowly forgetting the basic foundation of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. But then again, maybe you were there and maybe you are an expert, but then again, I didn’t see you at the board meeting! Enough said, case closed… judgment against you for sad comments!

  21. facts are facts says:

    Zip I applaud u on ur statements n facts that u brought to the table I should b a law student. I commend u on staying with the facts n not adding m ur own personal issues! Not many people can produce a valid bias argument! Kudos!

  22. facts are facts says:

    *typo* you should b a law student!

    1. zip says:

      Thanks facts are facts! No law for me. I just believe that there should be proof of guilt. Not guilt based on what someone said, or claimed. I have to remember that the board is not a court of law and that their job is not to prove beyond a reasonable doubt,, but rather to keep the administrators on the right track and to get past any embarrassing moments with as little damage as possible. It is not their job to overturn a principal’s decision for the most part. That would be admitting that the perhaps the principal had made a wrong decision. Trust would be lost, and the school board needs public trust at any expense.

    2. sheriff says:

      Facts, You want to speak ebonics? Come to Baltimore, the brothers will take good care of you. Wonder why you can’t get a job offer? Try speaking & writing in English.

  23. Twin1 says:

    If the girls weren’t drinking prove it just smelling there breathe don’t prove anything!

  24. zip says:

    Thanks facts are facts – I was in the board meeting that evening. I do not have a family member involved in this issue, but was stunned at the testimony provided in the case. Most of the testimony provided by Ms. Kubic was based on policy and how she ensures that each student know the policy and strives for their safety. I applauded that. I was a fire fighter for many years and hated that so many high school students were injured due to alcohol. But the fact remains, that there was no real proof that all those girls involved had broken the rules, yet all were punished by guilt by association … that is except two. One was the date of one of the girls who admitted bringing a bottle and the other was the girl who named the rest of the kids in the Limo. I understand not having the boy be part of all this, but I’m saddened that the girl who was sitting in the Limo too, and if the bottle was passed to all, as Ms. Kubic stated, would also be guilty by association. I can’t sit by and let school administrators who we charge with the education of our youth, create their own standards. Having double standards is not the answer and is teaching the students the wrong message!

  25. whatnow says:

    Hopefully one lesson the students not drinking will learn, if they stop listening to their bombastic parents who obviously haven’t taught them to have self-pride and common sense, is that you must pick your friends well. The company you keep says a lot about you. The non-drinking students should have had the self-confidence to get out of the limo and not go to the prom with the drinkers. I’m sure at least one of them would have had a parent proud enough of the group to drive them to the prom. Rules are rules. Life just gets harder after high school so learn from this and move on.

  26. zip says:

    I agree whatnow. The non drinkers did go to the prom with the intent on an enjoyable evening. The sad part is the one girl who in testimony was seen staggering and slurring speech cast blame on all the kids in the limo. So, with her testimony against her “friends” she was allowed to be cleared to leave the prom. Yes, rules are rules, but there was never proof that the rules had been broken. Only that based on the nose of Ms. Kubic, and her own admission that she assumed these girls may have passed around a bottle of something and the statement that she thought it was the smell of alcohol. I believe that if the rules were broken then punishment should occur. But in this case, proof was never there. only assumption and hearsay at the expense of all the girls, whether they drank or not. There are double standards here. If one girl is guilty by association then they all are. Ms. Kubic and that board cannot set the standard on making that claim yet allowing one of the girls in the Limo walk because there was no proof! What is the truth?

    1. Dasha says:

      Maggie H Posted on here some good namesGIRLS1 Maggie2 Molly3 Lady4 Sadie5 Lucy6 Daisy7 Ginger8 Abby9 Sasha10 Sandy11 Dakota12 Katie13 Annie14 Chelsea15 Princess16 Missy17 Sophie18 Bo19 Coco20 Tasha21.Dixie22.Sashta23.Kya24.JasmenBOYS 1 Max2 Jake3 Buddy4 Bailey5 Sam6 Rocky7 Buster8 Casey9 Cody10 Duke11 Charlie12 Jack13 Harley14 Rusty15 Toby16 Murphy17 Shelby18 Sparky19 Barney20 Winston21.Odis22.Milo23.Skooter24.Phonizlol i put migage in there bc my names migage but it is a really good name

  27. JohnnyRuss says:

    Interesting story. Just shows that the system’s conditioning of our kids toguilt by association and how to turn your friends in is working. For those of you defending the following of the rules…shame on you. All you’re doing is teaching your kids to be good and stay in line when getting aboard the cattle cars.

    1. whatnow says:

      Do you support Snitches get Stitches. I see nothing wrong with teaching your child that there are rules to life because guess what, there are. A lot of stuff is unfair. But I also taught my child, don’t drink until you are 21, if then, and if you are out with underage drinkers, get away from them and call me. I will never hold you responsible for other’s actions as long as you are responsible for yours. If we teach our children they do NOT have to follow rules and get aboard the “cattle car”, anarchy will rule. Oh, that’s right, it already rules the streets of Baltimore City. Is that what you want?

    2. zip says:

      Good point JohnnyRuss, It is so sad to see that two of the girls who were only in ther Limo to share expenses and were not named in any of the testimony and did not have their breath condition assumed by Ms. Kubik suffer the same fate! Guilt by association! Yet, one girl who was in the limo, was accused of drinking, was released. Even though she was in the Limo sitting next to other “guilty girls” was not at the same level of association as the rest of the girls guilty of association! That was never explained at the board meeting!

  28. Billiam says:

    Zip – 20 posts? What is your involvement in this? While a lot of people here are speaking emotionally, which is to be expected, I can’t help but wonder what stake you have in this story? When you have kids in a limo and there is “some type” of drinking going on, it almost doesn’t matter who did and who didn’t. The rules are the rules, and in a scenario like this with things happening so quickly, the end result isn’t going to make anyone happy. But it all goes back to association – no I wasn’t in the limo and no I wasn’t at the meeting – but in the end, you have to do what you think is best for you; getting in the limo probably wasn’t the best decision any of those who didn’t drink made that night.

    1. zip says:

      I’m a reporter who was there and seeking the truth. If found guilty, then punish, but be fair with your judgement.

  29. Lauren says:

    You need to learn to follow the rules. As you go on in life you are taught to follow rules. I am guessing these are the children of parents that do not follow rules. All the seniors are warned a head of time if anything happens they will not walk. Sorry for those who do not understand this, hats off the Dr. Kubic for following the rules. Children are a product of their enviorment I am guessing their parents have never followed rules. Teachers are there to teach not raise these children. It is time to stand up and maybe learn a lesson. In life there are rules.

  30. Ed says:

    Dr. Maxwell, Dr. Kubic thank you for doing your job. If we as educators give in to all these parents what are we teaching their children?
    Yes, they are suppose to have fun and enjoy the evening, but only when they follow the rules.

    1. zip says:

      Nice comments Ed. School administrators should do their job and enforce the rules. That is what rules are for. But Ms Kubic assumed all the girls were guilty according to here own testimony. Educators are taught to never assume but to gather the proof. Ms. Kubic per hwer own testimony was overwhelmed to the point that she had to rely on hearsay adn assumptions. After this educationl embarassment, the board and Mr. Maxwell had no choice but to uphold this decision in hopes that the testimony by Ms. Kubic would not come to light. I agree, follow the rules, but if it is proven all the girls are guilty by association then all the girls should pay. But one girl who was in the Liimo did not pay! Is ther a double standard Ed? Mr. Maxwell? Ms. Kubic? Just asking what is the definition of “guilt by association.”

  31. zip says:

    I agree with you Lauren, and yes, hats off to Ms. Kubic for the rules, but she as you, assume the rules were broken. I see on here that many comments are quick to convict these girls with simple assumption. That is the argument. Not that there are rules, but were the rules broken. That was never proven only assumed. As an educator, you would think Ms. Kubic would understand that. After watching and listening to her testimony, I know based in her own words that she assumed the girls were guilty. Not a decision a professional educator should make in a court of law. But, this wasn’t a court of law so these kids have to live with the stigma of being found guilty by assumption! Are you guilty by assumption!

    1. sheriff says:

      Zippity doo dad, The prisons are full of guilt by assumptions. If smart, dedicated & have the verve, they shall rise above this little speed bump of life quickly. Self pity, loathing? that’s the difference between winners & losers.

  32. Tad says:

    These will be the same kids in jail later and the parents saying oh my kids did not do it. Dr. Kubic did her job and hats off to her. The parents that are complaining were not there Dr. Kubic was.
    Mom and Dad had raised their child to follow rules this would not be happening. Most likely these are the same children that think it is okay to get a hotel room after prom. Parents wake up pay attention to what your children are doing.

  33. george says:

    LMAO. you know i dont care that they blew straight. fact is AACO has a zero tolerance policy. the students knew that as ceremonies approached because the school has meetings with seniors and reiterates that if they are caught doing xyz then they will suffer the consequences. they are reminded repeatedly. they even signed a contract making them responsible and entering into agreement on the punishment they receive if they the contract is broken. it doesnt matter whether it was one drink or one person. to smell of alcohol when they arent exactly screening the seniors coming into prom, means someone had a few or they all had a few. if only one of the bunch took a breathalyzer, then they all had something to hide….maybe it was one drink….but underage i thought it was mandatory for them to blow because being of underage. regardless its done…i hope northeast and AACO uphold this decision and stick it to them.

    1. zip says:

      Old news George, this is not an argument against the policy, but was there proof the policy was violated. Does the simple assumption of guilt by Ms Kubic make the girls guilty? It does according to the school board and Mr. Maxwell. My question is, was there proof that the contract was broken? Not based on the testimony I witnessed. As for the breathalyzer, it was stated in the board meeting that several students requested they be given a breathalyzer, but were denied by Ms. Kubic because the police only administer the test in the event a crime had been committed. Hmmmm, you would think that underage drinking would be a crime. Again a decision made by Ms. Kubic that no crime had been committed allowing a breathalyzer, but a crime had been committed allowing her to remove the students from the prom and ultimately the graduation ceremony! I ask, why not administer or request a breathalyzer if you think a crime has been committed and get the proof that will hole up in court. Again, a decision made by someone without the expertise in this situation. That proof alone would have convicted or acquitted these girls, but Ms. Kubic didn’t think a crime had been committed!

  34. ETOL says:

    It is amazing to me that so many of you have takent he time to write hateful, comments against the parents, students and whomever may have written above or below you. You should all be ashamed of yourself for judging a book by the cover. All the comments look like something off of a Jerry Springer show. Very sad. We have zero tollerance policy as well. But the rules should be the same across the board, not specific to individual students. Thats were the descrimination comes to play. For the record NONONE got a breathalyzer test, they asked for it to prove their innocence. Only One student got a Blood test which showed mo alcohol present. This was from a professional who is trained in a lab facility not just someone who sniffs the breath of a student.

    1. whatnow says:

      By criticizing everyone’s comments but your own, you show yourself to be an excellent candidate for Mr. Springer’s show yourself!

  35. zip says:

    You are correct ETOL. There are a lot of hateful comments and quick convictions here. I for one do not know for a fact if the students drank or not. Nor do I have a dislike for Ms. Kubic. My concern was that these students were found guilty without proof beyond assumption and the board upheld the administration’s decision. In my opinion this was to try and lesson the bad decision of Ms. Kubics assumptions of guilt!

  36. Can't Fix Stupid says:

    Zip looks like you sure has a lot to say! Maybe you should Zip your mouth! You are right Zip, you can’t fix stupid! Maybe you were the one who purchased the booze…

    1. zip says:

      Nice comment Stupid. I understand your need to vent. at least you are attempting to engage in conversation and help clear these girls. No I did not purchase the booze. And even if I did, you would have to prove my guilt. And until that, I like these girls are innocent until proven otherwise!

      1. zip says:

        Some think I called you stupid! I’m sorry if it sounded that way. I was using the short version of your screen username. What I meant to do was address your comment by starting out with your username of Can’t Fix Stupid. My bad! Thanks for venting and engaging in this conversation!

  37. Tad says:

    They will not walk, that is the no toleance rule. Learn something from this and go on. Sorry for your mistake. The first of May all Seniors are warned and this is not the only AAC school that this has happened to. Those children did not walk either. It is Dr. Kubic’s call to make. The parents were not there.

  38. Tad says:

    To all the parents This is not Burger King you can not have it your way

  39. Tad says:

    To all the parents This is not Burger King you can not have it your way. It is the Board of Educations Rules

  40. zip says:

    True comments Tad, but you like so many other are quick to jump to judgment without proof. Tell me, were you in the Limo? At the Prom? Or at least in the boardroom listening to testimony? Again, it is not about if they knew the rules. They all admitted in the meeting they knew and understood. It is about is there proof beyond Ms. Kubic assumption they violated the rules. That was never proven. I was not in the Limo, so I don’t know happened. But I was in the meeting and it was never proven the girls did more than maybe pass a water bottle that had something in it! Remember, Ms. Kubic was not in the Limo either and she more than once stated to the board that she assumed all the girls were drinking! What other assumptions id Ms. Kubic making as her role of school principal? Are we sure the lessons being taught are correct or are we assuming (like Ms. Kubic) the information may be correct!

    1. whatnow says:

      Zip, you were in the meeting and it was never proven the girls did more than maybe pass a water bottle that had something in it. Get real. There is your answer right there if you know anything about teenagers. I don’t know which one of these girls you are related to or know, but the bottom line is if you show up in a car with underage drinkers, you are guilty by association and they knew it. They knew the rules. They knew it was wrong. If you had your way, they would graduate with their class. So they learn no lesson about rules our about picking friends. Next time, they will be the drunk driver that kills someone and then wonder why mommy or daddy or Uncle Zip can’t get them off. Have you taken a good look around the United States of America lately. Do you see it sinking into the gutter. One of the many reasons is people thinking rules and laws don’t apply to them. Most of us are done with it. Now go ahead and answer back and call me names like you have everyone else who dared to disagree with you.

      1. zip says:

        No need for for me to call you names whatnow.As I look back, I don’t believe I have called anyone names! What good woule that do me or you for that matter. I agree with you when you talk about Teens. I was a firefighter for many years and put a few drunk drivers including Teens in body bags. I know lots about teens but also know lots about the law and Due Process. What I state is that it was never proven that any of the girls drank prior to the prom. I’m not concerned with the night before or the night after. Just concerned that Ms. Kubic and the board apply due process based on Constitutional Law and show that they are innocent until proven guilty. I never said they were not guilty of that they did not drink, as I was not there. All I stated was that Ms. Kubic and the board failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that these girls consumed alcohol. You should be concerned that the school board as well as any level of authority follow the same guidelines of innocent until proven guilty. Ask yourself this question, what if it were you who didn’t drink, but someone assumed you had based on hearsay and assumption. Only you know if you did or didn’t, but someone said you may have. I hope you would want proof. That is all I am asking. Is the proof beyond a reasonable doubt! In the boardroom that night, that was not proven. I have no reason to call you names as I should not without proof! Now if I had proof, that is a different story. .

      2. zip says:

        whatnow, I went back and looked to see if I had been name calling. It looks by using the short version of the username Can’t Fix Stupid may be the offending target. If it sounded that way it was not meant to degrade. I was using the short version of the screen username. What I meant to do was address the comment by starting out with the shortened username of Can’t Fix Stupid. My bad! No negative intent, just searching for the facts and justice! After all this is still America!

  41. brenda walsh says:


  42. zip says:

    Congrats Donna!!! A job well done! Now on to your next life adventure!

  43. zip says:

    George Bernard Shaw once wrote: The problem with communication is the Illusion that it has been accomplished! Seems that is exactly what happened with these poor girls. The school board thought they were communicating a correct message, but the illusion stands. It was the assumption of guilt that convicted these children. That is now the lesson this these kids will remember!

    1. Nitro says:

      Good luck with those exhibitions, Tracy! And thank you for the link to my wisbete … just seen it!hope that you sell plenty … any prizes to be won?

  44. pat says:

    Well, it is over. They are now to go on with their lives. To those who followed the rules. Hope you enjoyed your day. Follow your dreams look out world here comes the class of 2011. To those who did not follow the rules. well, I m sure you will remember this day too, I hope you learned something from all of this. go to Northeast pick up your diploma. Follow your dreams too and learn from this do what is expected of you and enjoy your life.
    To the parents who called the press sorry you wasted your time.

    1. zip says:

      It was not wasted time calling the press, just a way to bring some things to light! Thanks to Youtube and facebook, the story has gone around the world! A lesson can always be learned!

  45. sheriff says:

    If they were not drinking, then prove it. If you can’t then tough darts., it’s the boards call. It’s not the end of the world. I was kicked off the stage just as I was to graduate for a misdemeanor. I went to an all Catholic no nonsense school. Attended summer school to get my diploma, went Airbore Ranger school, back to college at Rutgers & bought the small company I worked for. Made six figures back in the 70’s & laughed my a$$ off at reunions. This is no lie. I am retired today with children & grandchildren but I never forget the sting of that punishment in H.S. & guess what, I deserved it. Time has a way with the truth & the truth shall set ye free.

    1. zip says:

      it all comes down to proof! You see! You are right it is the boards call and they are not in a position to embarrass an administration decision. It was always about proof! Thanks for your story sheriff, There is always hope! I spent time with Rangers and SEALS myself! Thanks for your time in service to country!

      1. Catalina says:

        12. Plant a garden, even if it on your nalcoby, and include food plants.13. Begin a journal, if you do not already keep one, even if you only write in it occasionally.

  46. Passingwind says:

    Wow, i just cant believe all the coments. This is just like democrats vs republicans.
    I’m a Dad who is probably the most proud Dad in maryland tonight. My Daughter failed 9th grade, but turned her life around and graduated today at 17 with a 3.8 average. She worked harder then I ever did to achieve what she has achieved. She has had honor roll from 10th grade till now. My daughter like any teenager has gotten into alot of bad situations, and every time she has felt uncomfortable she has called either her mother or I to come and get her. She is more responsible then alot of adults i know.

    My daughter was in that limo, she did not drink, and did not walk across the stage today,

    Now lets see if we can put ourselves in her place;
    im in a limo, the driver is a cop, and now some of the occupants are passing a bottle around.. do i tell the limo driver to stop? he would want to know why.. if i told him why, what would happen to me? everyone would be kicked out, and everyone would now basically want me to pay.. or should i keep to myself and the other girls who want nothing to do with the alcohol.. i think the choice is obvious. My daughter was not friends with all the occupants, they shared the limo with mutual friends to share the cost. she did not have an association with the ones that drank. like stated b4, 1 of the girls was able to walk the stage, and after an emergancy court hearing another girl was able to walk. guilty by association does not come into play.

    The most important thing to me is; My daughter has done an awesome job. Words cannot express how proud i am of her. i did not get to see her walk across the stage today, but i know in my heart that this was due to Mrs. Kubics inability to govern the school in a professional way, at the hearing, her main purpose was to cover up all the mistakes she and her administration made, not the welfair of the girls. Mrs Kubic was ONLY trying to cover her own a$$.

  47. sheriff says:

    Passingwind, Tell yourself & your daughter then believe what you say. Dust yourself off & move on. The sting will gradually wear off & good chance she will never see most of the students she went to school with as she grows into woman hood. It is but one of many rejections she will have to endure during her lifetime so you & everyone else now just STFU & let’s talk about something else. Oh, Dad, you will never ever really know your daughter. You may think you do but daughters & sons have a whole different side when arounf their friends or who they think are their friends.

  48. Kat says:

    Listen all of you idiots. I am much older than you.
    We did not have such a thing as prom night and graduation. You either just got a job when there was any or you went in the military or went to college. Just take everything away and go back to basics. Then end.

    1. sheriff says:

      Kat, You’re one bitter sad a$$ old man. My what a miserable life you have led & I’ll bet you can’t wait to die & end it all so why not just jump off the f….k’n Bay bridege dic head. I graduated in 1954 & we had a prom & graduation. I was in a Catholic school which at the time in Philly, was not the most progressive but at least had a social conscience on these matters. Where did you attend school & that three person brick schoolhouse in Tn or W.Va? where all were related by the same daddy?

  49. Jim says:

    This principle’s story has more holes in it than a Steve Allen murder mystery. Maybe she’s the one who should have been kept from being at the graduation.

  50. Tad says:

    Dr. Kubic was not covering anything. They were there and lied lets face it would they have admitted no. they tried to get out of it. Sorry parents you could not have excues for them. they have to pay for their own action.
    Whether it be in the wrong place at the wrong time, or the people you are with. Hope in life these kids find new friends. They all are going on and going to pay taxes know. I sure hope so anyway and my tax dollars are not paying for them,

  51. zip says:

    Nice try Tad! It was never said Ms. Kubic was covering or hiding anything ( read the transcript) Only that she made assumptions and inconsistant statements and never provided proof any of the girls drank in the Limo or before the prom! This really is not that confusing. But I find that folks quickly pass judgement and assume guilt if they don’t know the facts! Were you in the Limo? at ethe board meeting? so like many many others assume! As for tax law, not sure you are an expert there either! I know I’m not, but am assuming ( ha ha ) my taxes help pay for the school! Hmmm, maybe I’m to blame!

  52. Curious says:

    OK so what happens now? Did the students graduate Thurs or did the courts award the student his grant to suspend all school functions?
    Just Curious

    1. zip says:

      The students all graduated, most were not allowed to walk at the ceremony. One student who was in the Limo was not found guilty of association and garnered no punishment! Double standard! Assumption of guilt! Sad these girls lost all they did because someone though and someone assumed a violation of school policy had taken place! The school leaders will be back in charge next school year! I wonder what teaching points will be planned for the next crop of seniors! I for one will not assume, but will rely on the facts! Interesting concept in education!

  53. truth says:

    . i apologize for my spling because my phone wont let me chamge my mistakes.Rokay for one what kubic did was illegal. she held the kids up at prom for a couple of hours, without letting them leave of have their parents to pick them up. she “suspected” cohol on one of the students, thus getting everuone from theimo punished. most of the students didnt even know there was alcohol in theimo! But since they were theree they were punished too. she refused to let them take the breatherleyzer test amd even the police said she didnt have enough proof for them to take it

  54. Bernard Mc Kernan says:

    Truth, Suggest you not text & drive at the same time & better yet, go back to school & learn how to spell & compose a draft. Ebonics is not part of the english language.

    1. Camilo says:

      Read a cookbook (new to you) and try the riepces! You can buy new or used and the library has many titles on offer. Try the smoothie and tea recipe books too.

  55. An23153 says:

    Haha sucks for them. They learned an important life lesson: Watch the company you keep.

  56. mark says:

    That’s Aimee, with an i and two-e’s, is right when she said she learned a life lesson. It is important who you associate with and what allow to happen when you are in attendance to something happening. No sympathy whatsoever.

  57. Federico says:

    adiheistmght on June 21, 2011 Guys! OwnagePranks should call a chinese restaurant with that accent and make a huge order then cancel it. Then he should call back with a different number to the same restaurant with his regular voice and make the same order and act like he doesnt know what the asian guy is talking about if he gets mad. Thumbs up so people can see and hopefully OwnagePranks will do it!!!

  58. breathalyzer says:

    Great weblog right here! Additionally your website rather a lot up very fast! What host are you the use of? Can I get your affiliate hyperlink on your host? I want my site loaded up as fast as yours lol

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Watch & Listen LIVE