Look at this article ... http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=14860522&BRD=1344&PAG=461&dept_id=433794&rfi=6
This may shed some light onto the subject.
Yeah; it's the 'town rag': one WOULD expect them to take the chief doughnut-muncher's side against the whistleblower. No matter how the evidence was obtained, it shows solomon DID give directions for the parents NOT to be notified. And that's wrong, plain wrong.
Hypothetical: if something HAD happened to the kids as a result of their actions (or yet may happen now that they're known) and nobody had EVER known that they were narking for solomon, would he have come-clean and told everybody everything? Yeah, sure - no civil suit THERE...