SD Education Report
Education and the
Culture Wars Blog
San Diego
Education Report
Education Reform
Larkins case summary
Site Map
Case Timeline
Free Speech
Team Success
Ethics in gov't
Defamation Suit
Cheryl Cox Games
Free Speech
Conflicts of interest
Federal Judges
College presidents
Highest paid
Gov't eavesdropping
Typical abuse by teachers
ADD at Olympics
African Am Ed
Bullies in Schools
Fixing Education
Peters case in Vista
Schools and violence
Fred Kamper case
Kids bullying kids:
Jeremiah Lasater case
Bullies are popular
Stutz Artiano Shinoff &
Holtz v. Maura Larkins
Stutz' First Amended
Elizabeth Schulman
Elizabeth Schulman and
Larkins case
Rock Star Superintendent
Failure to Think
092704 Nevitt statements
Main Timeline
Motivations CP teachers
Case Summary
2003 Stutz invoices
2002 SDCOE payments
to Daniel Shinoff
2003 part 2 Stutz invoices
Public Records Requests
SDCOE Crosier denial
Payments to Shinoff
Maura Larkins
Deposition of
Maura Larkins

Judge Ahler OAH
page 89-91

Is Shinoff or Mark
Bresee to blame?
pages 91-94

pages 95-105

pages 105-111

pages 112-123

pages 124-138

pages 138 -

Errata and signature
Summary Judgment
Return to "Why this
Daniel Shinoff Declaration for his defamation suit
against Maura Larkins

Did Mr. Shinoff ask the North County Times to erase its 2003 article about him in order
to hide the truth, which contradicted a document (Exhibit E, below) that Shinoff
attached to this declaration?

Daniel Shinoff refused to be deposed for
his own defamation suit, but Judge Judith
Hayes nevertheless relied on this declaration to rule that he was defamed.
See motion to compel
"...Some people might find it hard to believe, but I harbor no malice toward
Daniel Shinoff.  

"I believe that human beings do the best that they can, and when they violate
the law, it is usually a matter of confused thinking and overconfidence.  

"My guess is that honest lawyers simply don’t get hired by
San Diego Office of
Education-Joint Powers Authority and member school districts.  Schools don’t
want lawyers who blindly follow the law.  School officials want lawyers who are
willing to take, or create, opportunities to wrestle undeserved legal victories
from the justice system.  Plaintiff probably figured that somebody was going to
get rich doing what school officials want, and it might as well be them.  This sort
of greed and rationalization is a natural part of the make-up of human beings
around the world and through the ages.  

These natural instincts seem to be the basis of how the world functions; why would
I harbor malice regarding an apparently immutable fact of life?

This does not mean, of course, that I don’t try to make the world a better place.  
My website is a major part of my efforts to bring more respect for the law and for
human beings to San Diego schools... "
Declaration of Maura Larkins
(in response to the above statements)
Maura Larkins wrote about Daniel Shinoff
on her website for the same reason she
wrote about
all these lawyers: the actions
of these individuals deserve public

Shinoff's usual tactic is to smear anyone
who opposes him in any way.
Declaration of Daniel Shinoff
in support of motion for summary judgment
Oct. 2008
Shinoff's Exhibit E
The letter that turned out to be a hoax.
Here is attorney Daniel Shinoff's letter in
response to Maura Larkins' letter.
Judge Judith Hayes refused to consider the following declaration filed by Maura Larkins, even though
Maura Larkins behaved like someone who was telling the truth, someone who had nothing to hide: she
submitted voluntarily to a completed six-hour deposition and submitted hundreds of documents as

Why would a judge rely on the declarations of Plaintiffs who behaved as if they had something to hide
by refusing to look for "lost" Bate-stamped documents and by refusing to be deposed?  We can only
speculate, but it should be noted that this judge was forced out of the criminal courts due to her
decision-making pattern.  
To see more exhibits from this declaration, click here.
Education Reform Report