Schools

School District Files Motion To Dismiss Leung Rape Report Lawsuit

SAU 8 officials motion to dismiss a request to release a teacher-student rape case investigation. ACLU-NH files an objection to the motion.

Merrimack County Superior Court will hear oral arguments Friday concerning whether or not the public gets to look at a Concord High School teacher-student rape investigation.
Merrimack County Superior Court will hear oral arguments Friday concerning whether or not the public gets to look at a Concord High School teacher-student rape investigation. (Tony Schinella | Patch, file photos )

CONCORD, NH — Merrimack County Superior Court received dueling motions in court 48 hours before a hearing to decide whether or not the Concord School District will be forced to release a 100-plus page report into how and why a high school teacher was kept on the job after allegations of inappropriate behavior with a student were raised that led to rape charges in Massachusetts. The American Civil Liberties Union of New Hampshire, on behalf of Dellie Champagne, a Concord parent, and the Concord Monitor, filed a lawsuit in Merrimack County Superior Court for access to public records under the state's right-to-know law for the "first report" about the Primo "Howie" Leung investigation in November 2019. The lawsuit was filed after requests for the report were made by Concord NH Patch, the ACLU, and Monitor reporter Leah Willingham.

Leung, a former "distinguished educator" with the district, faces two counts of aggravated rape of a child as well as single counts of indecent assault and battery on a child under 14 and over 14. He's accused of sexually assaulting a Concord girl during English language learner and culture summer programs that Leung ran at the prestigious Fessenden School in Newton, Massachusetts.

The requests to eye the investigation were rejected by Stephen Bennett of Wadleigh, Starr & Peters LLC, using prior case law as well as the "internal personnel practices" exemption of NH RSA 91-A, the state's right-to-know law.

Find out what's happening in Concordfor free with the latest updates from Patch.

In its motion to dismiss, a nine-page brief, Bennett told the court while the petitioners didn't like the exemptions of 91-A, they were the law and were currently being upheld by the New Hampshire Supreme Court. The superior court was bound by case law "unless and until" 91-A was changed by either the Legislature or the Supreme Court decided to reverse its prior decisions.

Bennett said the petitioner's use of eight different allegations pointing to the district's potential negligence in handling the Leung case showed the report was not created for disciplinary reasons but to "ascertain how the district responded" to the misconduct. Those allegations do not constitute a basis for releasing the report because the petitioner essentially admitted the report is an internal document dealing with employee misconduct, he wrote. Bennett again cited the internal personnel practices exemptions and prior case law which showed the report should remain sealed and requested a dismissal of the case.

Find out what's happening in Concordfor free with the latest updates from Patch.

In a 59-page objection, the petitioners countered that keeping the report sealed potentially insulates wrongdoers from public scrutiny and omits any consideration of the "obvious and compelling public interest in the report's disclosure." The district, the objection stated, still hadn't given specific reasons to the public why former Superintendent Terri Forsten and former Principal Tom Sica were terminated two days after reading the report.

"Moreover, Concord’s taxpayers also have had no ability to meaningfully vet the adequacy of the recommendations proposed in the subsequent … report without knowing how the district responded to allegations that Howie Leung was abusing students. Despite this obvious public interest in disclosure, the district — including the Concord School Board — continues to leave its constituents in the dark as to what transpired."

The district, the objection noted, is not legally required to keep the report secret; it is essentially using a loophole in the law, via an exemption, and it doesn't have to adhere to that exemption. The objection added despite the request by the public for more information, even via a redacted, summarized version of the report, the district has declined to be transparent.

The petitioners filed numerous counter-motions, arguments, and exhibits requesting that the superior court reverse previous rulings on internal practices exemptions in order to assist in moving its lawsuit forward — which would lead to the release of the investigation.

Both sides will be in superior court Friday morning to make oral arguments in the lawsuit.

Read the full motion to dismiss here:

SAU 8 Motion To Dismiss by Nh Patch on Scribd

Read the full objection here:

NH ACLU Files Objection To SAU 8's Motion by Nh Patch on Scribd

PREVIOUS PATCH COVERAGE:

Got a news tip? Send it to me at tony.schinella@patch.com. View videos at https://www.youtube.com/user/tonyschinella.

Get more local news delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for free Patch newsletters and alerts.