That was my take away as well. This is a very subjective report;almost sounds as if minds were made up (specifically Perrone, Horn and Neary) before the investigation was started. An investigation that I still assert was a waste of money and couldve been avoided had the employee’s supervisor addressed Perrone’s and Colby’s concerns early on.

It is hard to ignore the fact that the report presents Colby’s complaints about Perrone as her “perceptions“ and “feelings.” Yet Perrone’s responses to her complaints are presented as fact in that he ”stated” he did not yell at her and was questioning her in a “direct” manner because she doesn’t answer his questions (according to him, and presented as fact in this report). One person’s perception of  being “direct” and “frustrated “ is another person’s perception of being yelled at or condescended to, yet how differently these perceptions are presented in this report. My “perception“ is that this summary report lacks the objectivity one would expect in a legal summary, and is a whitewash to save face for both the lawyer and the board.