3rd Graders Witness S*x in Dunbar Locker Room

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I love all the people trying to excuse a 4-way witnessed by small children during the school day.

Literally what is wrong with you?

+1

My kids in APS do swimming field trips to Yorktown and have to change in the locker room. The teachers specifically solicit parents of both genders referencing the need for adults to monitor locker rooms.

I’m a pretty laid back parent about a lot of things (I’ve always been open about talking with my kids about the basics of sex, consent, gay marriage, respecting pronouns, etc. but I hope there is never a day that my response to 9 year olds witnessing other minors have sex in a school locker room is “meh.”

Well I would not want some unknown father to be “chaperoning” my perfectly capable 9 year old changing out of his swimsuit. No. I’d rather the teacher did a check of the Locker room to make sure no teenagers were making out or having sex in the showers and then I’d like them to change in privacy. Not under the watchful eye of Brayden’s father.

A parent would have to have DCPS volunteer clearance, which includes a background check.

Oh yeah that makes me feel better about the dad coming into the changing room with my sons (not)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, we should definitely believe random anonymous posters citing a friend of a friend over the mother of the child in question.

So you're believing the one anonymous woman in an article saying her son says he saw something different than the school reported happening. And not what the school reported happening, or what a few people claiming to have inside knowledge are saying happened.

You're believing the anonymous person in the print media over the anonymous person on the internet, but they both have exactly zero credibility

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, we should definitely believe random anonymous posters citing a friend of a friend over the mother of the child in question.

So you're believing the one anonymous woman in an article saying her son says he saw something different than the school reported happening. And not what the school reported happening, or what a few people claiming to have inside knowledge are saying happened.

You're believing the anonymous person in the print media over the anonymous person on the internet, but they both have exactly zero credibility

I don't think DCPS or CHML have credibility either. Look at how they handled the Jhervian Green situation (and the police report details behavior much worse than what CHML disclosed). They just Principal A on indefinite leave ... again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, we should definitely believe random anonymous posters citing a friend of a friend over the mother of the child in question.

So you're believing the one anonymous woman in an article saying her son says he saw something different than the school reported happening. And not what the school reported happening, or what a few people claiming to have inside knowledge are saying happened.

You're believing the anonymous person in the print media over the anonymous person on the internet, but they both have exactly zero credibility

I don't think DCPS or CHML have credibility either. Look at how they handled the Jhervian Green situation (and the police report details behavior much worse than what CHML disclosed). They just Principal A on indefinite leave ... again.

She’s gotta go that’s one thing for sure. She consistently makes mistakes that lead to incidents such as this and needs actual consequences other than a paid vacation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, we should definitely believe random anonymous posters citing a friend of a friend over the mother of the child in question.

So you're believing the one anonymous woman in an article saying her son says he saw something different than the school reported happening. And not what the school reported happening, or what a few people claiming to have inside knowledge are saying happened.

You're believing the anonymous person in the print media over the anonymous person on the internet, but they both have exactly zero credibility

I don't think DCPS or CHML have credibility either. Look at how they handled the Jhervian Green situation (and the police report details behavior much worse than what CHML disclosed). They just Principal A on indefinite leave ... again.

Uhm, if they just put the principal on leave again, I'm guessing her original message to the community was not accurate and there's some there there in this article despite the naysayers on this thread...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, we should definitely believe random anonymous posters citing a friend of a friend over the mother of the child in question.

So you're believing the one anonymous woman in an article saying her son says he saw something different than the school reported happening. And not what the school reported happening, or what a few people claiming to have inside knowledge are saying happened.

You're believing the anonymous person in the print media over the anonymous person on the internet, but they both have exactly zero credibility

I don't think DCPS or CHML have credibility either. Look at how they handled the Jhervian Green situation (and the police report details behavior much worse than what CHML disclosed). They just Principal A on indefinite leave ... again.

Uhm, if they just put the principal on leave again, I'm guessing her original message to the community was not accurate and there's some there there in this article despite the naysayers on this thread...

It has nothing to do with the incident itself. We were told it’s because she failed to report the incident in a timely fashion. That doesn’t mean it happened- it means she failed in her duty as an administrator (again). Best not to comment if you don’t know what’s going on… just like this reporter shouldn’t have put this story to print without any actual facts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, we should definitely believe random anonymous posters citing a friend of a friend over the mother of the child in question.

So you're believing the one anonymous woman in an article saying her son says he saw something different than the school reported happening. And not what the school reported happening, or what a few people claiming to have inside knowledge are saying happened.

You're believing the anonymous person in the print media over the anonymous person on the internet, but they both have exactly zero credibility

I don't think DCPS or CHML have credibility either. Look at how they handled the Jhervian Green situation (and the police report details behavior much worse than what CHML disclosed). They just Principal A on indefinite leave ... again.

Uhm, if they just put the principal on leave again, I'm guessing her original message to the community was not accurate and there's some there there in this article despite the naysayers on this thread...

It has nothing to do with the incident itself. We were told it’s because she failed to report the incident in a timely fashion. That doesn’t mean it happened- it means she failed in her duty as an administrator (again). Best not to comment if you don’t know what’s going on… just like this reporter shouldn’t have put this story to print without any actual facts.

Isn't that pretty much a fireable offense? Parents at CMHL should be emailing the chancellor and the instructional superintendent for the cluster calling for this. Mandatory reporting is no joke-there's legal liability involved that can include fines and even jail time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, we should definitely believe random anonymous posters citing a friend of a friend over the mother of the child in question.

So you're believing the one anonymous woman in an article saying her son says he saw something different than the school reported happening. And not what the school reported happening, or what a few people claiming to have inside knowledge are saying happened.

You're believing the anonymous person in the print media over the anonymous person on the internet, but they both have exactly zero credibility

I don't think DCPS or CHML have credibility either. Look at how they handled the Jhervian Green situation (and the police report details behavior much worse than what CHML disclosed). They just Principal A on indefinite leave ... again.

Uhm, if they just put the principal on leave again, I'm guessing her original message to the community was not accurate and there's some there there in this article despite the naysayers on this thread...

It has nothing to do with the incident itself. We were told it’s because she failed to report the incident in a timely fashion. That doesn’t mean it happened- it means she failed in her duty as an administrator (again). Best not to comment if you don’t know what’s going on… just like this reporter shouldn’t have put this story to print without any actual facts.

Sorry, she just failed to file the report on time (DCPS claims), but we’re 100% sure that her version of events was accurate? Yup, yup. I’ve got a nice bridge to sell you too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, we should definitely believe random anonymous posters citing a friend of a friend over the mother of the child in question.

So you're believing the one anonymous woman in an article saying her son says he saw something different than the school reported happening. And not what the school reported happening, or what a few people claiming to have inside knowledge are saying happened.

You're believing the anonymous person in the print media over the anonymous person on the internet, but they both have exactly zero credibility

I don't think DCPS or CHML have credibility either. Look at how they handled the Jhervian Green situation (and the police report details behavior much worse than what CHML disclosed). They just Principal A on indefinite leave ... again.

Uhm, if they just put the principal on leave again, I'm guessing her original message to the community was not accurate and there's some there there in this article despite the naysayers on this thread...

It has nothing to do with the incident itself. We were told it’s because she failed to report the incident in a timely fashion. That doesn’t mean it happened- it means she failed in her duty as an administrator (again). Best not to comment if you don’t know what’s going on… just like this reporter shouldn’t have put this story to print without any actual facts.

If we want to talk about “again,” last time her letter to the community massively understated the gravity of what occurred. Not sure why you’re assuming this time she was an A+ truthful reporter despite parental claims to the contrary… just like last time. Guess who was right last time?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, we should definitely believe random anonymous posters citing a friend of a friend over the mother of the child in question.

So you're believing the one anonymous woman in an article saying her son says he saw something different than the school reported happening. And not what the school reported happening, or what a few people claiming to have inside knowledge are saying happened.

You're believing the anonymous person in the print media over the anonymous person on the internet, but they both have exactly zero credibility

I don't think DCPS or CHML have credibility either. Look at how they handled the Jhervian Green situation (and the police report details behavior much worse than what CHML disclosed). They just Principal A on indefinite leave ... again.

Uhm, if they just put the principal on leave again, I'm guessing her original message to the community was not accurate and there's some there there in this article despite the naysayers on this thread...

It has nothing to do with the incident itself. We were told it’s because she failed to report the incident in a timely fashion. That doesn’t mean it happened- it means she failed in her duty as an administrator (again). Best not to comment if you don’t know what’s going on… just like this reporter shouldn’t have put this story to print without any actual facts.

If we want to talk about “again,” last time her letter to the community massively understated the gravity of what occurred. Not sure why you’re assuming this time she was an A+ truthful reporter despite parental claims to the contrary… just like last time. Guess who was right last time?

DP-I wasn't there. Neither were you. Regardless, she should be removed. This is her second major infraction. Again, parents should be demanding for her to step down.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, we should definitely believe random anonymous posters citing a friend of a friend over the mother of the child in question.

So you're believing the one anonymous woman in an article saying her son says he saw something different than the school reported happening. And not what the school reported happening, or what a few people claiming to have inside knowledge are saying happened.

You're believing the anonymous person in the print media over the anonymous person on the internet, but they both have exactly zero credibility

I don't think DCPS or CHML have credibility either. Look at how they handled the Jhervian Green situation (and the police report details behavior much worse than what CHML disclosed). They just Principal A on indefinite leave ... again.

Uhm, if they just put the principal on leave again, I'm guessing her original message to the community was not accurate and there's some there there in this article despite the naysayers on this thread...

It has nothing to do with the incident itself. We were told it’s because she failed to report the incident in a timely fashion. That doesn’t mean it happened- it means she failed in her duty as an administrator (again). Best not to comment if you don’t know what’s going on… just like this reporter shouldn’t have put this story to print without any actual facts.

One of the complaints that Hardy parents and the IS had with Errol Johnson--the principal booted from Hardy after one year--was not reporting major incidents to DCPS as required. I recall wondering where a first time principal got the idea to just ignore that requirement.

Funnily enough, he was an AP at Dunbar before becoming principal at Hardy.

[Anonymous]

Honestly if they fire her who would even want that job. One of the hardest in the system.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Honestly if they fire her who would even want that job. One of the hardest in the system.

How? Less than 500 students. Seems like an easier principal position than most.

[Anonymous]

The boys are Black and Gay. We have to stop targeting our young Gay, Black males! Where is the compassion for them! #bigotry #noh8 #pridelove👨‍❤️‍💋‍👨

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: DP-I wasn't there. Neither were you. Regardless, she should be removed. This is her second major infraction. Again, parents should be demanding for her to step down.

Nope, this is her THIRD infraction. The first was the after-school worker and an underage child having a questionable relationship.