The recent Sayreville School District Board of Education meeting was mostly business as usual — aside from a heavy media presence — the night after sentences were announced for six football players in connection with locker room hazing incidents last year.
Then, during the public comment portion of the meeting, the mother of two football players not involved in the scandal questioned board members about the future of one of the players involved.
“These kids have been through enough,” Carolyn Porcaro said at the Sept. 1 session.
Porcaro questioned board members about a closed hearing on Aug. 31 regarding one of the defendants, who, she said, has not been allowed to return to school.
Last year, seven students were charged with various counts in connection with the hazing, with some facing aggravated sexual assault charges.
Six of the seven students either pleaded guilty or were found guilty of lesser charges, leading to probationary terms and 50 hours of community service. All will avoid mandatory registration as Megan’s Law sex offenders, according to the Middlesex County Prosecutor’s Office.
The seventh defendant is awaiting trial.
It was unclear whether the board took any action at the closed hearing, and board members repeatedly declined to respond to Porcaro’s concerns. Board attorney Jonathon Busch came to their defense.
“The board cannot talk about student matters. It’s prohibited by law,” Busch said. “As much as you want information, we cannot give it to you.”
Porcaro also asked board members if they had contributed to a news article, posted online Aug. 31, regarding the sentences.
Board President Michael Macagnone said that information was released by the Middlesex County Prosecutor’s Office, adding that the prosecutor has managed the flow of information relating to the case since the investigation began last October.
“This has always been an issue for the prosecutor and the Family Court judge,” Macagnone said. “It’s out of our hands.” When Porcaro asked Macagnone if he stands by the previous characterization of the incidents as hazing and a reasonable determination to cancel the Sayreville Bombers 2014 football season, he responded affirmatively.
“I stand by the cancellation of the season,” Macagnone said.
“The board voted unanimously to support [Superintendent Richard Labbe’s] decision, and I see no reason to change that.”
John Bovery, a Sayreville resident, said during the public portion that the entire hazing scandal has been difficult for the borough, but added he supports the board even if he does not always agree with the handling of the situation.
“This goes back to the term ‘widespread and pervasive,’” Bovery said.
“That stuck in my craw for about eight months, and that [term] originated with the county prosecutor.
“But I never heard the word ‘innocent,’” he added. “In this country, we don’t put people on probation for innocence. It seems to me all six are guilty of something.”
On Sept. 1, Richard Klein, an attorney for one of the defendants, issued a press release disputing the prosecutor’s assertion that “the facts that were alleged by the Middlesex County Prosecutor’s Office at the beginning of this case have clearly been proven in a court of law.”
“It has been my contention from the onset of this case that the prosecutor’s office should never have originally charged my client with the offenses that they did,” Klein said. “Sadly, their inappropriate [statements] only perpetuate the harm caused to my client and his family.
“It is true that my client was adjudicated guilty on minor offenses … [but] my client was adjudicated not guilty/delinquent on all of the original six charges as alleged by the prosecutor’s office.”
“My client will be exploring all of his legal options that are available to him under the law,” Klein concludes in his statement.
A spokesman for the prosecutor’s office could not be reached for comment.
Sayreville school district officials did not comment on whether the students charged in connection with the hazing would be returning to school in the district.