CHA dean resigns over Rosenau letter

Recanting previous testimony, Jerome Murphy admitted last week to authoring an anonymous letter to Andrew Rosenau's first-choice college. The correspondence may have violated a court order.

by MICHAEL J. MISHAK

Chestnut Hill Academy's dean of students resigned last week in a new twist in the school's case with former student Andrew Rosenau, whom the school sought to dismiss in 2002.

Jerome Murphy, dean of students in the all-male institution's upper school, offered his resignation after admitting in his sworn deposition on May 25 to writing a warning letter to Rosenau's college of choice, Lehigh University, two years ago, in violation of a court order that enjoined Chestnut Hill Academy from doing anything to harm Rosenau's education.

Two weeks earlier, Murphy denied allegations he wrote the letter, even when confronted with his own handwriting during his original deposition on May 13.

The Local has obtained a copy of Murphy's May 25 deposition, in which he admits to "misrepresenting" himself.

"Someone in the school administration saw fit to sabotage this boy's career," Rosenau's father, Lee, told the Local. "I can't help but wonder who else they did this to."

Andrew Rosenau, then a senior, had applied for early admission to Lehigh, Murphy's alma mater.

Murphy, who earned a Master of Education degree from Sacred Heart University, has been employed by Chestnut Hill Academy since 2000.

The letter, printed on CHA stationary, was dated November 5, 2002, one day after the school's legal challenge to a special injunction that enjoined Chestnut Hill Academy from interfering with Rosenau's education failed.

Attached to the letter was a copy of a CHA internal memo that detailed the school's decision to expel Rosenau for his participation in an off-campus incident where he and a CHA junior conspired to photograph the junior's girlfriend without her knowledge. The photos, which were destroyed before any adults, including school administrators, saw them, allegedly contained images of the young couple embracing. Both the school and the Rosenaus have agreed the photos did not contain any nudity.

Identifying himself as "a concerned educator," Murphy wrote two sentences, the second of which reads, "As a postscript to the attached information, you should know that the Rosenau family has since filed an injunction, in addition to a lawsuit for damages in excess of $250,000, along with the reinstatement of their son to Chestnut Hill Academy."

When presented with a list of questions by the Local regarding Murphy's actions, Chestnut Hill Academy declined specific comments, instead issuing a statement late last week. "Chestnut Hill Academy has been involved in ongoing litigation involving a discipline incident in 2002. As a result of a recent development relative to this case, we have been made aware of information that involves a member of our staff. As a result of this new situation, our Dean of Students submitted his resignation, which we have accepted," the statement read. "Effective immediately, we have relieved him of his Dean of Student duties, and he will not be employed by CHA in any capacity beyond the end of this school year. We will appoint an interim Dean of Students for the 2004-2005 school year."

The statement echoes a letter sent to CHA parents on May 27, which was signed by CHA head of school Francis P. Steel Jr. "Jerome has dedicated himself to CHA over the past four years, and I have much respect for the many ways he has positively influenced CHA. He has done a fine job in many aspects of his role as Dean," Steel writes.

Although the school cites its policy of "not discuss[ing] publicly discipline or personnel matters," notes of a May 25 deposition obtained by the Local reveal much of Murphy's actions and motivations.

Murphy did not return calls seeking comment.

The deposition makes clear Steel asked the school's faculty to volunteer any information they may have had about the letter when it surfaced earlier this year as part of Andrew Rosenau's Lehigh admissions file, subpoenaed from the university.

In his deposition, Murphy says he wrote the letter on a school computer and printed it on the school's official letterhead.

In last week's deposition, Murphy said he met with Steel on May 17 to take responsibility for writing the letter, four days after denying it in his original deposition. The letter was initially discovered in February when the Rosenaus' lawyers subpoenaed Andrew's admissions file from Lehigh University.

Murphy said Steel "was disappointed in my judgment in writing the letter." During the meeting, according to the deposition, Steel informed Murphy he could not continue as dean of students, and his employment was in question.

"I couldn't live with myself the minute I walked out of this building Thursday, May 13," Murphy said in his deposition last week. "It was the guilt that I felt and I am ashamed and embarrassed for having misrepresented myself."

Murphy claims he acted alone and was motivated by his own affiliation with Lehigh University. As a Lehigh alumnus, Murphy said, "I felt it was the right thing to do at the time Š I felt they should know."

When asked why he wrote anonymously, Murphy said, "I did not want it being passed off as an opinion of the school or a directive from the school."

Pressed by Alan Dion, the Rosenaus' attorney, about his having knowledge of the court-ordered injunction at the time of the letter, Murphy responds, "I believe I did," but insists he cannot recall the exact date or format of that message.

In fact, CHA head Frank Steel sent an e-mail to "CHA Staff & Faculty" with the subject line "Andrew Rosenau" on November 4, 2002 at 6:26 a.m. "We have been served a court order to re-enroll Andrew pending the outcome of a hearing on the recent discipline situation," the message reads. "We are obligated to follow this court order. Andrew should be treated as any other student."

Murphy wrote and sent the letter the following day.

When asked if the letter was intended to harm Rosenau's prospects of admission, Murphy insisted his intention was "to make Lehigh University aware of what was going on." He labeled the letter and its attachment as "objective information" to be used in the school's application process.

But Lee Rosenau charges Murphy with malice, citing the dean's handwritten identification of only Andrew Rosenau in the attached internal memo that details the photographing incident, which also involved another student.

"If he thought it was the right thing to do he would have signed it as an individual," Rosenau said in an interview.

"This happened on Steel's watch," Rosenau said. "You should clean your own house."

Murphy's actions may have real legal consequences. Lee Rosenau, an attorney, said that Murphy could be formally charged with perjury, as well as held for contempt of court for violating an injunction that prohibited Chestnut Hill Academy from interfering with Andrew's education.

"This is a disciplinarian," Rosenau said. "And he's the one breaking real laws."

As a father with another son still attending Chestnut Hill Academy, Rosenau is concerned for his, as well as other students', futures. He is calling for stricter control of the administration.

For Rosenau, Chestnut Hill Academy and its head did not go far enough. "What kind of investigation did they really do?" Rosenau said. "Steel raised the issue at a faculty meeting. He didn't press it." When asked about the extent of its investigation, the school declined comment.

"Why are parents paying $18,000 a year for this sort of treatment," he said.

The school has still made no indication it will give Andrew his diploma, Rosenau said. "They're holding the diploma hostage," he said. "This has caused a lot of harm and we're not going to drop the lawsuit."

The Rosenau case is scheduled for trial in civil court on August 16.