Public criticizes handling of alleged social-media post; board cites state police investigation

A public commenter at the Wyoming Valley West School District meeting raised questions about an alleged social-media post linked to a staff member and challenged the district’s handling of the investigation, prompting the board to describe steps taken and to recommend a formal request for the state police findings.

Duane McDap said he had been told previously the post "never existed" but asserted that thousands of people had copies and asked why the district’s attorney and administrators had told the public a post did not exist. McDap also pressed the board on whether the district’s hired private security firm had reviewed the staff member’s personal devices without a warrant and why the school filed a complaint with police if the post did not exist.

Board representatives replied that the complaint had been filed by the individual identified as the victim, Mr. Jarski, and that the Pennsylvania State Police conducted an investigation. The board said it had also hired a private security firm to review district equipment; that firm did not find a corresponding post on district systems or through the Internet service provider. "The investigation as we understand it and has been confirmed by the private company we hired indicates that there was never a post made to his account that was received by the Internet service company," a board representative said.

Public commenters disputed whether the private firm accessed personal equipment or only district-owned systems. Board representatives said the private firm reviewed district-owned systems and that the state police handled the criminal investigation; they suggested requesting the State Police report through a Right-to-Know request for definitive documentation.

The exchange left several questions unresolved in the public meeting record: commenters sought to see the state police report and asked for clarity on whether personal devices were reviewed without legal process. The board reiterated that the case involved a state police inquiry and that any formal report would need to be obtained from the State Police through established channels.

No formal board action on the investigation was taken at the meeting; the public comment period ended and the board proceeded with other agenda items.