Home Police, Fire & Courts Document: Allegations From Fired Bus Driver Led to Investigation of Brick Superintendent

Document: Allegations From Fired Bus Driver Led to Investigation of Brick Superintendent

9
SHARE

Walter Uszenski (File Photo)
Walter Uszenski (File Photo)
An investigation into suspended Brick schools superintendent Walter Uszenski was initiated after a school bus driver who lost her job when she left a child on a bus provided information to Mayor John Ducey about the case, a document produced by the Ocean County Prosecutor’s Office and obtained by Shorebeat said.

The document, an investigation report narrative written by a detective from the prosecutor’s office, said Ducey met with Prosecutor Joseph D. Coronato only after the probationary bus driver, identified as Marcella Butterly, went to his office and made the allegations, some of which have now been proven false, according to court documents and sources with knowledge of the case.

“Ms. Butterly stated that she was covering a route for another driver who had called out sick,” the narrative states. “While covering the route, Ms. Butterly had inadvertently left a child on the bus who should have been dropped off at the Educational Enrichment Center … Ms Butterly defended herself to Mayor Ducey by stating that the child fell asleep on the bus and, prior to conducting a check of the seats, she was asked to drive the Brick Township School District superintendent’s grandson to a private day care facility located in Beachwood.”

ADVERTISEMENT - STORY CONTINUES BELOW


Uszenski’s grandson was, in fact, attending a private facility on Princeton Avenue in Brick – not Beachwood – and, according to sources, the EEC building was not being used for classes at the time of the incident because of a mold issue. Last week, an indictment alleging Uszenski – who remains suspended from his position without pay – commited a crime by allowing the grandson to attend the private school was dismissed by Superior Court Judge Patricia Roe, who was critical of prosecutors for failing to include exculpatory evidence a grand jury presentation.

Sources also confirmed Butterly was terminated from her position after the incident. She was a probationary driver at the time it occurred, records showed, having been hired in Feb. 2014.

An excerpt of an investigative report produced by the Ocean County Prosecutor's Office. (Credit: Source)
An excerpt of an investigative report produced by the Ocean County Prosecutor’s Office. (Credit: Source)
Ducey said Monday that he only relayed information to the prosecutor’s office that the driver told him, a fact which the report confirmed.

“Mayor Ducey advised that he did not question Ms. Butterly about the transportation of the purported grandson of the superintendent,” the narrative states.

Ducey spoke to a Shorebeat reporter on the matter Monday.

“Once she told me those facts, I had an obligation, in my mind to go to the prosecutor’s office,” Ducey said, adding that his decision to take the matter directly to the prosecutor was an example of “following the right channels.” He said he did not inform authorities of any allegations besides what the driver, now identified as Butterly, told him.

“I’m assuming they took my information and investigated it,” said Ducey.

“If this did turn out to be true, and I didn’t relay it, then they’d be saying I was part of some coverup,” Ducey added.

A woman who answered a phone number associated with Butterly initially told a reporter she believed the call was a prank from an old friend, eventually hanging up. The woman, who never identified herself, called back about 15 minutes later to ask the reporter what question he had about a meeting with Ducey. She declined to identify herself, then called the question “bizarre” before hanging up the phone a second time.

The prosecutor’s office has yet to decide whether it plans on presenting the case to a grand jury for a third time. Uszenski has retained a labor attorney in addition to his defense attorney to receive advice on how to proceed. Uszenski has more than a year left of his five-year superintendent’s contract, which expires June 30, 2018.


SHARE
  • Michael LoBianco

    A once stand up world is now a world full of RATS!

    • john talty

      Again I repeat that the Mayor should have stayed out of this issue as it concerned the Transportation Dept of the Brick schools. I am sure if an employee of the town went to see the school Superintendent about a town issue,who than reported such issue to the Prosecutors office, our Mayor would not be to happy that the Superintendent by passed him.
      The bus driver was wrong that she didn’t follow proper procedure as outlined in booklet given to each employee, which calls for all bus drivers to check each seat before starting a new assignment, which this probationary employee didn’t follow.As a result she was rightfully terminated.

      • Andy Pat

        If this is the Talty who served on our BOE I think you would be well served by a remedial spelling class!
        Also, once reported to Ducey, did he not have a duty to report?

      • Hbadger

        The mayor has a duty to report but straight to the prosecutor’s office? Then use the innocent man’s mug shot for his political campaign? He now lies because he used it for political gain at expense of both taxpayers and dr. U’s family. He is not noble but a self absorbed politician with a biased agenda.

      • john talty

        What word did I misspell? I did not skip a space ( issue,who) and apologize for that. Ducey again in my opinion should or could have reported it to the Superintendent first. I can understand some who were not involved and knew nothing of what this bus driver did, could assume she was being picked on by being terminated.

      • Andy Pat

        “than” should be then and “to happy” should be too happy.
        Not a biggee-As a taxpayer I grade elected officials on content, policy and accomplishments way more than spelling. And as always, math counts more than spelling!

  • Jonathan

    Let’s attempt to wrap our hands around this.. if you want you can simply follow the published articles in sequential order and develop your own opinion, but Ducey initially claims that he had nothing to do with the investigation, HE WANTED A RETRACTION FOR GOODNESS SAKE…upon showing him evidence, he CHANGES IT UP and says, I was involved, but he spoke only about a “relative to the super” and NOT THE SUPER’S GRANDSON and furthermore, his comments to the prosecutor were more like a “kind of a combination of facts” (no clue what that means), now he claims that he had to do the right thing and share the comments made by the bus drive to the prosecutor and by the way, those comments were exactly about Dr. uszenski’s grandson…. DOESN’T MAKE SENSE FOLKS!! Ask yourself, why wouldn’t he want to be upfront from the beginning?
    It’s coming….

  • Chief Wahoo

    Wow. Ducey must be desperate to hold onto those Cadillac Health Benefits paid to a part timer by the sheep of Bricktucky. Lord knows he doesn’t want to have to pay for Obamacare himself, like the rest of the sheep of Bricktucky.

  • Make America Greater

    Ducey and his girlfriend Jim Fozman also misled the taxpayers to believe that they would not take cadillac health benefits for their part time jobs if elected.
    Theyre taking them at a cost of about $35,000 a year each.
    They also insinuated they would roll back Acropolis 25% tax increase.
    They didnt. They even raised it again a couple of times.