Thursday, October 25, 2007

Green Resigns in Penn Delco

Facing criminal charges for failing to disclose a few hundred dollars in commission payments, Penn Delco school boarder John Green resigned Wednesday night.

I'm devoting tomorrow's print column to the subject.

It begins thusly:

"And another one bites the dust.

"Just a month after ridding itself of its lawsuit-threatening solicitor, the Penn Delco school board accepted the resignation of board member John Green, a man who knows when to quit."

You won't want to miss it.

UPDATE: As promised, Spencerblog has posted a rather lengthy response to some of the comments found below. Just click on comments and scroll down to find it.

76 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yeah, getting arrested for allegedly violating the public trust as a school board member would be time to quit, you idiot. Sereni was not charged with anything by anyone but you.

You have really shown that you are not all there. And that your obsession for this man has made you nuts.

Only you could minimize the arrest of a school board member for a FELONY violation to keep the focus on the now former solicitor you repeatedly malign for no reason.

Maybe this is due to the fact that you stood up for John Green (your source against Sereni?) by leading your readers to believe, when you knew he had reportedly admitted to voting for tax money to go to his own company, that there was "no significant conflict of interest"?

Gil Spencer calls that "insignificant".

The DAs office calls that a felony.

October 25, 2007 at 10:32 AM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Sometimes though, it's better to simply admit a mistake and move on. It shows integrity and confidence ...."

Gil, do agree with the above quote? You should, because it's your own.

Why don't you display some of that "integrity and confidence" by admitting to your mistake that you had relied on the word of an accused felon (John Green) as a source against Sereni, even though you had known or recklessly disregarded the fact that he was so apparently a corrupt source?

I'll look forward to your admitting your mistake in your print column tomorrow.

October 25, 2007 at 11:34 AM 
Anonymous check your sources said...

Mr. Spencer,

What do you mean that John Green "is a man who knows when to quit"?

Haven't you checked with your remaining sources (such as School Board President Dave Seitz and school board member Kimberly SanGiorgio) about what transpired in the private meeting among the school board members and John Green immediately before the public meeting?

Haven't you learned that John Green came into that private meeting and allegedly stated that he had every intention of staying on the school board and of "facing the public"?

Haven't you learned that in this private meeting, the majority of the school board members allegedly told John Green in no uncertain terms that if he did not immediately resign, they would vote at the public meeting to demand his immediate resignation?

Haven't you learned that Dave Seitz and Kimberly SanGiorgio sided with John Green but came out on the losing end?

Haven't you learned that it was only then that John Green high-tailed it out of there and chose not to appear at the public meeting, even that his chair and name plate awaited him?

If not, is that your idea, Mr. Spencer, of reporting the facts? Or is that your idea of distorting the facts?

And is that really your idea, Mr. Spencer, of "a man who knows when to quit"?

Sincerely,
A Former Admirer

October 25, 2007 at 11:50 AM 
Anonymous Heck said...

Very interesting comment, Check Your Sources.

I do know two things for a fact:

1. when John Green's immediate resignation was announced, the large audience clapped very loudly

2. Kim SanGiorgio voted AGAINST accepting John Green's resignation.

I wonder whether Gil will report these two facts tomorrow.

October 25, 2007 at 11:55 AM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey, Gil! Will you be reporting (I use that term loosely, since you are clearly not a reporter) on John Green's role as the Penn-Delco Education Foundation's Treasure? What's going to happen there? Will he be resigning from that mess that he helped to create? Looking forward to your take on this.

October 25, 2007 at 11:56 AM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Isn't John Green's criminal defense lawyer Michael FX Gillin, the same Newtown Township GOP politician who headed up the now-defunct Chester Upland Board of "Control" and who voted to hire the infamous Keith Crego (former Penn Delco school board president arrested for multiple felonies) as the Superintendent?

Isn't that tie beween Green and Crego more than a bit disturbing?

October 25, 2007 at 12:01 PM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The applause from the public audience for Green's resignation was positively thunderous!

But you could here a pin drop when Sangiorgio voted not to accept Green's resignation! And then the murmurs in the crowd started ....

October 25, 2007 at 12:41 PM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Are you really sure that John Green is a "man that knows when to quit." Because personally I think he should have resigned when the story broke that he allegedly backdated his statements of financial interests, an ethics violation. I'm sure you'll raise that issue as well in your column tomorrow.

October 25, 2007 at 1:01 PM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

October 25, 2007 at 1:08 PM 
Anonymous Please go away now said...

Can one of you anonymous people let Mark know he was fired and he no longer needs to attend meetings anymore. I think Mark must have overlooked that memo.

October 25, 2007 at 4:33 PM 
Anonymous also laughing at spencer said...

John Green would have gladly stayed on the school board despite the felony charges against him if the rest of the board (except for his buddies Dave Seitz and Kim SanGiorgio) didn't stand up to him. He showed up at the meeting ready for business as usual - even had his name card out - and planned to simply resume his seat.

John Green doesn't know when to quit.

And neither does Gil Spencer.

October 25, 2007 at 4:51 PM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

October 25, 2007 at 5:15 PM 
Anonymous jeremy19015 said...

I have to admit I really don't want to miss Spencer's print column tomorrow, just like he says.

I can't wait to see how much deeper a hole this jackass Spencer is digging for himself.

Hey DT, I think you're going to need a good laywer -- uh oh, you've already alienated the best one around. Not smart!

October 25, 2007 at 6:01 PM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

uh oh. gilly's losing his fan club. apparently people don't like to see a felony charge poo-pooed and the man accused glorified for "knowing when to quit" (which isn't even what happened.)

October 25, 2007 at 7:05 PM 
Anonymous randal said...

Boy, you folks still have your feelings hurt about that whole Sereni thing? And you’re still personally attacking Gil just because you don’t like what he says. Jeez… What a bunch of pathetic losers. Move on already. I hope you’re not teaching your children to carry on like this over petty, inconsequential crap.
Your display here is much worse than anything Gil has said.

October 25, 2007 at 7:24 PM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You mean losing his fan club except for Randal, of course. Who keeps a picture of Gil by his bedside...actually, i think Gil keeps a picture of Randal by his bedside, right behind the one of Mark Sereni. :)

October 25, 2007 at 7:45 PM 
Anonymous sorry for Gil said...

Doesn't look like Gil is doing such a good job of following in his papa's shoes. He's sure never getting a Pulitzer Prize with the crap he makes up!

Must be hard being so inadequate, in so may ways.

October 25, 2007 at 7:52 PM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

October 25, 2007 at 8:00 PM 
Anonymous I remember Gil said...

I've watched you over the years, Gil, and I think you must be feeling pretty low tonight, now that John Green (your source?) went south and your "case" against Mark Sereni fell apart.

But not as low as the night you and Mark Sereni and a number of other guys were featured in a bachelor bid, and Sereni was snapped up, and no one bid on you.

You need to get past it now, Gil.

Game's over. You lost. He won.

October 25, 2007 at 8:26 PM 
Anonymous randal said...

It would appear you have that backwards.

October 25, 2007 at 8:58 PM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Wow. Why are some of you attacking Gil? He is writing what is going on and he isn't making it up. What don't some of you get?

October 25, 2007 at 9:25 PM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey, I know how Gil removed that comment about the blog about him from here, but how'd Gil get that blog about him removed from Susie Madrak's site? And why?

Very telling, that.

October 25, 2007 at 9:43 PM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Even though I usually agree with Spencer, I can't with this one.

These charges are more serious than Gil makes them out to be, and they're not about the $800 in commissions. The bigger concern, in my mind, is the lack of disclosure of the relationship between JG and Tempair. Gil points out that Tempair was the low bidder, but the reason (one of the reasons, anyway) you have to disclose these relationships is to make the bidding process fair and transparent. If there is a undisclosed relationship, how do you know the bidding process was fair, and that Tempair wasn't provided inside information to ensure they were the low bidder? I'm not saying that happened in this case, by any means, but the disclosure rules are meant to not only make sure it doesn't happen, but also to demonstrate to people that it isn't happening. The $800 is nothing. The lack of disclosure of the relationship, and the lack of vote abstentions, are the real issues. "Knowing when to resign" is not impressing me. As if he really had a choice.

Gil also tries to make the case that these charges are not for "minor" financial interests. JG's commissions might have been only $800, but Tempair's income was a lot more than that. And if Tempair obtained that income based on inappropriate involvement of a School Board member who was in their employ, then its not a "minor" financial interest.

The financial disclosure form situation, although troubling, don't bother me quite as much. But, If JG had taken other steps to disclose the relationship like announcing it at a public meeting and abstained from the vote, then no one really would have cared about the forms. But obviously backdating the forms was done to conceal things (Note to self: next time you back date a form, try not to use a form that didn't exist on the date you're signing.) . The penalty for not having the forms on file is surely not as bad as the penalty and bad PR for getting caught backdating one.

October 26, 2007 at 4:17 AM 
Anonymous disappointed said...

Sorry, Gil, you overreached here. It's obvious you're trying to protect Green, and the only reason for you to do that is to protect yourself.

I'm sorry to say but I have noticed over the past few months that you seem to be stuck on one note here and not showing very good judgment. Now I am really questioning your motives. You called this one totally wrong.

October 26, 2007 at 11:01 AM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

After reading Susie Madrak's blog in which she had some pretty strong negative things to say about Spencer, (and which I notice is mysteriously gone, as well as the reference to it here, hmmmmmm), I don't understand how Gil can keep making fun of someone for exercising their right to sue for false information published about them. When Susie Madrak made what Gil said was a false statement about Gil, he didn't waste any time commenting on her blog and pointing out that printed lies are actionable.

I think Gil needs to be reminded that printing lies in a newspaper is not only wrong, but actionable. And not just when the one hurt is himself.

It's also totally irresponsible for him to excuse John Green the way he did, just to protect himself for using bad sources. Very bad form.

October 26, 2007 at 11:59 AM 
Anonymous Heck said...

Gil, if John Green is a man who knows WHEN to quit, does he also know WHERE to quit from?

Why isn't John Green quitting from that disgraceful Penn Delco education foundation board, where's he's been the long time treasurer?

Why aren't you writing about that?

October 26, 2007 at 12:01 PM 
Anonymous trigger finger said...

Luckily I printed out the piece Susie Madrak did about Gil before it mysteriously disappeared. She was right on about him.

He's a hypocrite. Mr. Heron, we deserve better.

October 26, 2007 at 12:12 PM 
Anonymous Its coming said...

See here is the deal with spencer. If you give him what he wants he tries hard not soften the blow. If and that is if Seitz ever got arressted what do you think that article would read like? First spencer loved him than hated him and then he would love him again. Spencer is a dope. He was given so much information on others that was true and he never used it because those people were his sources. Well some new information is coming out real soon, lets see how spencer doesn't report on this new news.

October 26, 2007 at 12:56 PM 
Anonymous randal said...

No doubt you shrill pile-on-ers would like to see less Gils and more radical Liberal idiot columnists like Gene Lyin.

October 26, 2007 at 1:06 PM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yo Gil what the heck were you smoking when you wrote that pathetic article ?? It was bizarre to say the least . Nice try making your pal Green look like a hero who deserves a vacation ! And man ,try laying off Serini - you bring him up all the time - it's making you look like a loser - an obsessed one at that . Get some help man , or retire. You're starting to lose touch with reality , and everyone I know agrees .

October 26, 2007 at 1:11 PM 
Anonymous The Real Heck said...

Just want everyone to know that the "heck" who posts on here is no relation to the "Heck" who posts on goaston.

October 26, 2007 at 4:03 PM 
Anonymous Heck said...

To the so-called "Real Heck",

After reading some of your posts on Go Aston, I am so glad that you have pointed out to everyone here that I am NOT the "Heck" who posts on Go Aston.

Frankly, I really would not want anyone to mistake me for you.

Are you related to "poor Johnny Green" or something? Seriously, you must feel quite embarrassed having been one of his most ardent supporters.

Fondly,
The TRUE Heck

October 26, 2007 at 6:05 PM 
Anonymous Disgusted said...

Gil, up until your most recent article, I was an avid supporter of yours. I looked forward to reading your updates on the Penn-Delco situation, whether in the paper or on the blog. I've commended you on your efforts to educate the community and serve justice. I have defended you when others implied that you had ulterior motives behind your reporting.

Gil, you let me down.

Readers have long speculated about the mysterious identity of your source. Based on your article today, and the lack of blog posts on his arrest, it can easily be assumed that the man leaking private school board information was none other than John Green. I can understand your desire to utilize every resource available to you, especially when that person served up story after story on a silver platter, but there comes a point when you need to break ties with your sources.

For months, you’ve been writing about John Green, the hero, the upstanding board member whose shining example should be followed by all. How could you have led us so far astray? Even with his arrest being public knowledge and the levels of deception and manipulation he attempted being discussed all over the county, you still managed to protect him in your article. As a reporter, your job is to reveal truth with your words. Instead you attempted to make the truth bend to your will by writing about how Green’s crimes weren’t that bad. After all, the amount of money he made off the deals was so minimal, how could this be a true crime? The money is not the most important factor to consider. His flagrant disregard for the trust bestowed upon him by the school board is one issue. He failed to report his affiliation with Temp-Air for two years, then hurriedly backdated some forms to throw into a file when he realized he was about to get caught. Then in his rush to falsify the forms, he failed to notice that the forms weren’t even in existence at the time he was claiming he completed them. He isn't just a thief and a cheat, he's someone who didn't even bother to put a little effort into his cover up.

The man actually had the gall to stroll into the private school board meeting on Wednesday, just days after being arrested for matters related to the school board. Green was ready to sit down as though it was just like every other meeting. Luckily there are still some good people on the board who prevented that from happening. So he’s off the school board… for now. But wait, isn’t that his name on the ballots for the November school board elections? He’s running for his second term, as though the first one wasn’t disastrous enough, and hasn’t withdrawn his name yet. Does he really think he can resign, wait for this situation to blow over, and gracefully re-enter the school board a changed, remorseful man?

Not only does he want to get back on the school board, but he still hasn’t resigned his position as treasurer of the education foundation. What reason could he possibly have to stay now? I think that he’s staying to cover up further corruption. Little by little, the crimes and lies of the Penn-Delco School Board are being revealed. What else does John Green have to hide?

So no, I will not be commending you for your hard hitting journalism this time, Gil. John Green broke the trust of the Penn-Delco district, and you’ve broken the trust I once had in you.

October 26, 2007 at 6:13 PM 
Anonymous not buying it said...

After following this saga for some months now, I think it's obvious that Spencer has some sort of vendetta against the former solicitor. There have been 3 arrests of people in that board/district, and Spencer has devoted almost no attention to that, while drumming out "story" after "story" about the former lawyer when there was nothing to tell.

But when Spencer stoops so low as to try to make an accused felon look like the good guy and the solicitor (who, from what I can see, is only guilty of inspiring jealous rage in Spencer), he has really gone too far. And for what reason did Spencer decide to so stupidly downplay the charges against Green? My guess is the same as many others have said - Green had to be Spencer's source for the things Spencer has said about Sereni, and Spencer has to try to prop Green up because otherwise we will all see that Spencer has been feeding us a bunch of bull.

I'm glad Spencer has revealed himself for what he is. I know for sure I can't believe a word he says. People like that should not be given the power of the pen.

October 26, 2007 at 7:02 PM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'm going to sum up all of the above real good -
SPENCER, YOU SUCK!!!!!!!!!!!!

October 26, 2007 at 7:30 PM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Gil - would you please explain why you removed a comment that someone posted on here relating to a blog Susan Madrack wrote about you in which you spoke about libel? I did not see the comment, but I heard about it and I can't understand why you would have removed it?

October 26, 2007 at 7:48 PM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Great article today Gil !! You have totally convinced me that John Green is my new idol !! Wow I made a shrine for him and everything , I blew up his mugshot for the centerpiece . It looks almost complete, I just need to backdate some forms and get a hold of some illegal commission checks for a finishing touch . But that's ok to do, cause you said it was ! I guess felonies are the new cool accessory of the season so I want one too !! Maybe if I get one my boss will give me a vacation for good behavior , you think I'd deserve one right ?? Cause John deserved one right ?? Well I gotta go light more candles in my shrine but I'll update you when I commit my felony - will you keep my secret safe too ?? Thanks !!!

October 26, 2007 at 9:45 PM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'll bet Gil rues the day he decided to create this blog. He must be so ashamed of himself. He can't even screw up the courage to address any of us anymore. He just comes on and deletes our comments when they hurt his feelings.

October 26, 2007 at 10:35 PM 
Anonymous randal said...

My feelings are hurt and Gil is a poopie head!

October 27, 2007 at 2:24 AM 
Anonymous Also disgusted said...

Disgusted, I understand where you're coming from. Let's pretend, just for a minute, that Green isn't guilty of everything you pointed out and more that the public isn't even aware of yet. I have a few questions.

Isn't one of his duties as a school board member to maintain the confidentiality of the private board meetings? In running to Spencer with news that wasn't supposed to be leaked, didn't he further betray the school board members and the public who elected him? How could Green believe that we would be foolish enough to elect him for a second term?

October 27, 2007 at 11:24 AM 
Anonymous Sark Mereni said...

I would like to take a moment to publicly apologize for making such an ass of myself on this blog and on GoAston. I'm in therapy and hopefully soon will be able to deal with my issues.

October 27, 2007 at 8:00 PM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

As for knowing when to quit I think the rest of the board with the exception of the last two appointees should quickly tender their resignations right away.For months it has been one fiasco after another they are representing no one but theirselfs.The only way to fix this situation and bring some sort of normalicy back to Penn-Delco would be that they all leave. I'm quite sure there are many in the communities involved that would be willing to sit in their seats. Ok let's lay Mr. Sereni to rest as we are all sick of hearing about this man.He needs to stop attending school board meetings as an onlooker. What does he think this will accomplish other than making his self look foolish. He had a lot to do with the way his situation turned out.No one ever promised him a lifetime job as solicitor of Penn-Delco.I personally wish him well in his next venture. As for Green yes he most certainly should have resigned and also should resign from the foundation. But remember he is on the ballot for November and yes he can be elected again. It's a vicious cycle isn't it.As for Gil there are no heros in Penn-Delco especially none on the school board past or present (excluding the two new appointees).

October 28, 2007 at 1:06 PM 
Anonymous Law Prof said...

Of course no one promised the now former solicitor Mr. Sereni a life-time appointment. At least I certainly hope not.

But, with all due respect, that's not the important point.

The important point - I dare say the critical point - is that John Green - the now former school board member charged with a felony ethics violation - had voted to fire Mr. Sereni (in a 4-3 vote) even though Mr. Green was apparently at the time under an ethics investigation prompted by information apparently provided by Mr. Sereni himself.

That's how I have read Mr. Spencer's latest column and an earlier Philadelphia Inquirer article, at least.

Pennsylvania's Ethics Act, like many statutes, contains an anti-retaliation provision which protects public officials such as solicitors who provide information about alleged ethics violations.

If those are the facts, it appears to me that Mr. Sereni has a rather strong retaliation claim.

I respectfully submit that whether Mr. Sereni continues to exercise his right under the Sunshine Act to attend public school board meetings should be the least of this school board's concerns.

October 28, 2007 at 2:53 PM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

law prof:

Sereni can not file any retaliation lawsuit against Mr. Green. Sereni filed his report after Green voted the first time to vote him out. Green voting the second time was just a follow up to the previous vote.

October 28, 2007 at 4:07 PM 
Anonymous law prof said...

Dear Anonymous,

Thank you for your comment.

You seem to have more intimate knowledge (perhaps of a personal nature) of the facts than I do.

But I trust you'll agree that I have a better understanding of the law, since that's my job.

The first vote - because it failed 4-4 - is relevant but not controlling.

What is controlling includes the second vote, the one in which Mr. Green joined for a 4-3 vote to fire Mr. Sereni.

Those who study and teach the law concerning conflicts of interest and retaliation would assert that Mr. Green arguably suffered from a conflict of interest at the time of that second vote, given that Mr. Sereni had allegedly as of that time provided information against Mr. Green regarding the ethics investigation.

In that Mr. Green obviously chose not to abstain from voting and instead voted AGAINST Mr. Sereni in that second vote, those legal experts would assert that these facts alone would establish for Mr. Sereni a prima facie case of retaliation.

The law would then shift the burden to Mr. Green to prove that the claimed reason he voted against Mr. Sereni was not "made up" in an effort to conceal his alleged true reason.

As I understand the facts, at the time Mr. Green had first voted to terminate Mr. Sereni, Mr. Sereni had already called for an independent counsel investigation regarding alleged corruption (apparently of the kind Mr. Green was eventually charged). Further, just a few months before, Mr. Green had voted along with the rest of the school board to unanimously reappoint Mr. Sereni for his seventeenth year as district solicitor, without so much as a peep of protest.

All in all, I believe most legal experts would conclude that Mr. Green would have a very difficult row to hoe.

But that's why we have juries. If a lawsuit is filed, it will prove to be a most interesting case.

October 28, 2007 at 8:32 PM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Boy, that explanation is as mind numbing as the debate as to whether the school board members took office at their appointment or their swearing in...

October 29, 2007 at 6:54 AM 
Blogger Spencerblog said...

There's seems to be a general theme here from the pro-Sereni/anti-Green claque of anonymous posters.

John Green is charged with the crime of failing to disclose the financial benefits ($838 over three years) he got from the company he works for when it did business with the school district.

Mark Sereni has not been charged with any crime and so Sereni should never have been criticized for his performance as district solicitor or fired.

Mr. Sereni's anonymous defenders obviously believe the best defense is a strong offense. They simply ignore their man's behavior during this entire episode.

That behavior includes:

1. A questionable legal opinion on an insurance plan that cost the district $600,000, a plan that benefited a friend of Keith Crego's but not the district's taxpayers very much, if at all.

2. His firm's suggestion to keep two sets of minutes for a particular public meeting; one for public consumption, the other for the true record. Not good, according to the lawyers to whom I spoke.

3. His angry and threatening e-mails to the board misconstruing the attorney-client privilege to the advantage of lawyers instead of clients.

4. His attempt to rally political support from clients by "Privileged and Confidential" letter asking them to question school board members who refused to take his advice to hire an independent counsel to investigate his charges of corruption. In effect, asking one set of his own clients to pressure another set of his own clients to do his bidding.

5. His proven and obvious chumminess with Keith Crego and his efforts to protect him during the PFA fiasco last fall. His allegiances were made clear in an e-mail to Crego after one contentious executive session and board meeting -- "All in all... a victory for us."

6. His subsequent and continued pursuit of other district officials who provided information to county investigators to Crego's legal disadvantage.

7. His legal proceedings against three anonymous posters, one of whom claimed "he was no better than a criminal." As a lawyer he must know that being called "no better than a criminal" is not a statement of fact but clearly an opinion and not actionable.

That a lawyer like Sereni would resort to such a lame tactic to shut-up his critics raises questions about his judgment, legal and otherwise.

8. Most important of all was Mr. Sereni's threat to sue the district should the board vote to replace him. As I have pointed out many times, school solicitors serve at the "pleasure" of the boards they represent. Over the last several months, Mr. Sereni has brought Penn Delco very little in the way of pleasure.

Talk to any lawyer who knows anything about solicitor-ships and they will tell you this is how it is. I am still waiting to hear from any (non anonymous) attorney who doesn't find Mr. Sereni's behavior during the last several months, at best, exceedingly odd.

As for my own writings on the subject, I think both my reporting and analysis are holding up just fine.

Those anonymous posters who claim I have presented John Green as a "hero" need to reread what I actually wrote.

I don't think of Green as a hero, but given the charges against him, I don't think of him as much of a criminal either. And I stand by my prediction that the felony ethics charge against him will be dropped and he'll get ARD on the misdemeanor claim.

I have been accused of being "obsessed" with Mr. Sereni and the Penn Delco situation. Well, I certainly admit to finding the whole crazy story pretty darn fascinating. And watching Sereni operate has been the most fascinating thing of all.

If he were a surgeon there would be blood all over the operating room and most of it would be his -- from self-inflicted wounds. After all, despite all his clumsy machinations he's the one who is out a $250,000-a-year part-time job.

I have to say that my favorite pro-Sereni posting on this thread recalls a Bid for Bachelors from some 20 years ago at which Mr. Sereni was allegedly "snapped up" and "no one bid on" me.

While I barely recall that evening -- maybe because I was so emotionally devastated -- I freely admit that Mark Sereni is a very attractive man. The photos of him in our newspaper have not always done him justice, a situation that I understand he has himself noticed, and one that has been rectified.

October 29, 2007 at 9:36 AM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Gil,

Don't you understand that whether or not we like or dislike Mr. Sereni, are proud or envious of him, or approve or disapprove of his legal advice and strategies really does not matter?

What does matter is that the very man you used as a source against Mr. Sereni - such as the utter falsehood, I'm told, that Mr. Sereni threatened to sue Penn Delco - has been accused of a felony ethics violation as a public official and has been forced to resign from the school board in complete disgrace.

Gil, you don't get it because you don't seem to want to get it. Instead of stepping up and admitting that you have used known corrupt sources to carry out your vendetta against Mr. Sereni, you now resort to the same lies and distortions, this time twisting them into an even more malicious form by falsely suggesting that Mr. Sereni had committed the crime of obstructing the administration of justice to protect the one-time school board president and now accused felon Keith Crego.

If Mr. Sereni is as litigation-minded as you paint him to be, you are best advised to issue an immediate retraction.

I'll disclose my name as soon as you stop using "undisclosed" sources.

Sincerely,
A Delaware County attorney

October 29, 2007 at 10:17 AM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

As someone who has been closely reading your columns over the past four months and other print accounts as well, I know that the problem - which is really YOUR problem - with your laundry list of "reasons" justifying the malicious and baseless attack upon Sereni, is that these "reasons" are grossly fictionalized to fit others' improper purposes.

I really hope that Sereni holds you accountable, in the same way he did his best to hold those who broke the public trust in Penn Delco accountable.

October 29, 2007 at 10:31 AM 
Anonymous Law Prof said...

Mr. Spencer,

You seem to be trotting out the same tired excuses for your vicious attack upon the victim here. "He brought this on himself!", you continue to proclaim.

As I understand the facts, the vicious attack upon Mr. Sereni began in early July just two days after (1) Mr. Sereni had recommended to the school board in a confidential communication that it engage a special independent counsel to investigate the very kind of alleged corruption with which Mr. Green has been charged; and (2) a school board member (Mr. Green?) had broken attorney-client confidentiality by directly or indirectly leaking that confidential communication to you.

No, Mr. Spencer, the attorney-client protection does not belong to Mr. Green in those circumstances. It belongs to the entire school board. Neither Mr. Green nor any other individual school board member had the right to destroy that confidentiality; only the entire school board had the right to give it up. Third-year law students know that, Mr. Spencer.

So let's get, and recite, the facts straight, Mr. Spencer. You began your attack upon Mr. Sereni then, NOT only after he had begun to, according to your quite unusual view, "behave" inappropriately.

Your "blame the victim" rationalization really irks me, Mr. Spencer, and frankly makes me worry about your well-being.

October 29, 2007 at 11:09 AM 
Anonymous Spencer's # 1 Fan! said...

Spencerblog said...
" I have to say that my favorite pro-Sereni posting on this thread recalls a Bid for Bachelors from some 20 years ago at which Mr. Sereni was allegedly "snapped up" and "no one bid on" me.
October 29, 2007 9:36 AM "

Spencer, I would've snatched you up in a heartbeat except that I was underage at the time and that might have gotten you in trouble.

October 29, 2007 at 1:12 PM 
Anonymous Spencer's # 1 Fan! said...

Spencerblog said...
" I have to say that my favorite pro-Sereni posting on this thread recalls a Bid for Bachelors from some 20 years ago at which Mr. Sereni was allegedly "snapped up" and "no one bid on" me.
October 29, 2007 9:36 AM "

Spencer, I would've snatched you up in a heartbeat except that I was underage at the time and that might have gotten you in trouble.

October 29, 2007 at 1:12 PM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey Spencer #1 fan - I sure hope you're not a girl. Because after reading Gil's comment that he finds that guy a "very attractive man", I wouldn't be so sure you
swing the same way Gil swings.

Batter up, Gilman.

But as Seinfeld once said, "Not that there's anything wrong that ..."

October 29, 2007 at 1:25 PM 
Anonymous Spencer's # 1 Fan said...

There's nothing wrong with a man that's secure in his masculinity.

October 29, 2007 at 1:38 PM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey Spencer #1 fan - Nor is there anything wrong with a man who is struggling to come to grip with his sexual identity issues, as long as he doesn't take those frustrations out on others, of course!

October 29, 2007 at 1:46 PM 
Anonymous Spencer's # 1 Fan said...

Anonymous who are you talking about Sereni or Spencer?

October 29, 2007 at 2:30 PM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey Spencer's #1 Fan - I'm talking about Spencer, of course. Don't know the other guy. But may be they would make a cute couple.
(Just kidding, Gil - now get that thought out of your head!)

October 29, 2007 at 4:16 PM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"such as the utter falsehood, I'm told, that Mr. Sereni threatened to sue Penn Delco" quote from Delaware Co. Attorney. maybe wanna make that alledged 'utter falsehood': Can you say Writ of Mandamus?

October 29, 2007 at 5:21 PM 
Anonymous FED UP!! said...

When is this going to end with Spencer and Sereni? Spencer has massive egg on his face and looks like a smacked ass and Sereni got fired. It's over. Move along! There is nothing to see here!

October 29, 2007 at 6:05 PM 
Anonymous Mrs. Diane Wilson said...

Gil, I would appreciate it if you would answer the following question. I think others would also.

Was/is John Green one of your sources for your coverage of the Penn Delco debacle?

If he wasn't, there is no reason not to tell us that, and I believe it would help people to feel more confident in what you have reported and what you report in the future.

Thanks.

October 29, 2007 at 6:33 PM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dear 5:21 pm Anonymous,

"Writ of mandamus"? Do you mean a mandamus action? If you do, that's not brought against the governmental agency (here the school district). That's brought against the district official or officials who are refusing to do what the law requires them to do.

So any mandamus action would be filed by Mr. Sereni against the individual wrongdoer, not against Penn Delco itself.

I hope this clears up your confusion.

Sincerely,
A Delaware County attorney

October 29, 2007 at 6:43 PM 
Anonymous you're toast said...

Hey Fed Up -

Spencer has egg not only on his face, he's got egg on every other square inch of his broken-down body. Spencer's not only toast, he's french toast! Sacrebleu, Spencie!

October 30, 2007 at 9:35 AM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The fact that Gil did not answer Mrs. Wilson's questions says it all.

Gil, you are the worst kind of slimeball.

October 30, 2007 at 11:25 AM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I hope the people of Aston finally see you for the phoney that you are and your phonies that dubded you and Green their hero. You used those people because you knew they were to dumb to see through your agenda. Your no better than Keith Crego, those people that went to the school board meetings and said I can't believe Crego had that much influence and they let him get away with everything he did. And how foolish are they,you did the same thing to them. How does it feel to have the finger pointed at you Gil. Maybe your little band of followers will start a petition to have the Daily Times fire you. Lord knows you deserve it more than what they did to Sereni.

October 30, 2007 at 3:50 PM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Gil Spencer is allowed his opinion the problem is he states things as fact when there is nothing to back it up. I can promise you that the Daily Times will be sued from some of Spencers writings. I know that it is already being looked at. He is not a journalist but he is a hound. If I were the Editor I would go back and read again some of the things Gil has written. Some of those things should have never gotten into the paper. Gil has changed his stories time and time again. Bad news coming for the Times.

October 30, 2007 at 6:12 PM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Of courses John Green was a source for Spencer. If you know John Green you know he is capable of being a snake. The others that fed Spencer information are pretty obvious too, JS, CF, JP, etc. Read his stuff again and you will see the connections. Spencer gives up sources to get more information from others. That is his job. Scummy as it is, that is the way it is.

October 30, 2007 at 6:43 PM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I just can't believe Spencer is too much of a coward to respond to the things people actually ask him directly. He just comes on here and deletes things that hurt his little feelings, then when he gives a "response" it is the same old horse shite that he keeps blowing.

October 30, 2007 at 7:06 PM 
Anonymous SOS DD said...

A couple of these anonymous posters are awfully cranky. What's a matter, you're ankle bracelet on too tight?

October 30, 2007 at 7:12 PM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Spencer has bigger problems that egg on his face. He has shown he will say anything, even when he knows he should be questioning his sources and won't come clean even when he has been shown up.

I hope someone does sue the Daily Times. This conduct is irresponsible beyond belief. Maybe a hole in their pocket book will teach them not to let this Spencer guy continue to run amok. Every single person I have talked to about Gil Spencer despises him and thinks he is an idiot. That's what everybody says. "Gil Spencer is an idiot."

What a legacy to pass on to his kids!

October 30, 2007 at 7:30 PM 
Anonymous ha ha ha ha said...

it could be worse anonymous, he could pass on to his kids the shame of knowing their father is a felon who took money from a charitable foundation, or he could leave the legacy of a man who was ran out of town but yet still had the audacity to show his face month after month.

October 30, 2007 at 7:40 PM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Dear haha:

Or he could aspire to being the kind of man who was RAILROADED OUT OF TOWN BY IGNORAMOUSES SUCH AS YOURSELF AND GIL SPENCER, yet has the courage to stick around long enough to make sure the real bad guys get taken away....which he did and, my guess is there is more to come.

That took a lot more guts than posting on here anonymously like you and me, or writing crap told to you by an accused felon, didn't it?

October 30, 2007 at 7:54 PM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This is not complicated psychology, people. Gil Spencer hates lawyers. And guys who actually achieved something with their lives, instead of doing opinion columns for a third rate newspaper. He is barely a step up from Dear Abby.

Plain and simple. He is envious of that lawyer guy and he is to be pitied.

October 30, 2007 at 8:28 PM 
Anonymous randal said...

Witness the level of petty hatred –yes, hatred- from the Left these days, folks. Thus is the state a Modern Liberalism.

These angry idiots need a serious dose of perspective… and some emotional maturity.
Any therapist worth their salt would tell them that for them to display such irrational emotion over things that do not even impact them directly is evidence of a serious mental disorder.

Are these the sort of unstable folks we want calling the shots in our county or our country?

October 31, 2007 at 9:58 AM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I just finished reading the article in the Times about the upcoming election in Penn-Delco and I cannot believe that Green told the Times that he may go back on the school board if he's reelected in November - despite the fact that he just resigned from the school board in the face of a felony ethics arrest! Unbelievable. Gil, please respond - you have the power to help Green understand the absurdity and arrogance of such a move; I think it's important that you take a stand on this issue that has my jaw hi

October 31, 2007 at 1:57 PM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

oops, didn't finish; jaw hitting the floor!!!

October 31, 2007 at 1:58 PM 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Are you kidding anonymous? Gil is in bed with Green. Green was his source. Gil doesn't think Green did anything all that much wrong, and thinks he should get ARD. Why would Gil see anything wrong with Green resuming his seat on the board? Don't you get it yet? Gil is NO GOOD. How much more proof do you need?

October 31, 2007 at 2:26 PM 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home