Grand Jury report on LCPS sexual assault cases is unsealed
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
|
FYI:
https://www.loudoun.gov/SpecialGrandJury?fbclid=IwAR0p-E9IBVzlLDjV5DV4ZZppna8wdl16Sp885j8B6goUFhKcarlCTUB1YEY I've read it and am trying to make sense of the document's purpose. By that I mean is it really a dispassionate analysis of what happened (because while I think they largely get it right they seem to not ask a lot of questions about the involvement of other entities including the LCSO) or it proof positive that the findings were baked in when the investigation was announced? In other words, is this akin to an indictment? Keeping in mind the expression that a prosecutor can indict a bologna sandwich). Some passages in the report give me pause, particularly those that seem to characterize behaviors of people sending e-mails. In other words, is it a bunch of allegations? Or is it conclusive? That said, the recommendations seem reasonable. And they do fall well short of recommending dismissal of the superintendent, etc. Jeff used to have a sticky about this issue (forgot to check if it was still there). I'm going to self-report my own thread here so he can monitor it. I'd like to try to keep this conversation civil and analytical about the significance of the report and avoid the hysteria that erupted when all of this happened a year ago and there was a lot of bad information out there. |
Anonymous
|
Testimony at the school board meeting that there is no record of sexual assaults in the restrooms.
This was called a lie by another witness. There is record of a sexual assault. Not sexual assaults plural. |
Anonymous
OP here. There are two assaults. One at one school the other after the boy was transferred he was convicted in a court of law. None of that is in dispute. This investigates more the actions of LCPS. |
Anonymous
Sorry, my grammar got away from me there. Assault 1 was in May. Assault 2 was in September. Different schools. |
Anonymous
The second one was not in a restroom. |
Anonymous
|
The report faults the school for not opening a Title IX investigation, and one official was dogged in pointing out these flaws in September.
I don't think schools and colleges should be doing these investigations, and instead the police should be handling it. |
Anonymous
| That is a pretty damning report. |
Anonymous
I never said it was. Why would you bring that up? |
Anonymous
Part of the problem is the LCSO dropped the ball initially. Had the boy been charged after the first incident, he might not have been transferred. |
Anonymous
They serve totally different purposes. Title IX looks at environment and institutional factors that facilitate a school environment that could lead to these incidents, and it is an opportunity for schools to identify ways to mitigate and improve. |
Anonymous
X1000 |
Anonymous
No, but they SHOULD be looking at ways to prevent future incidents. |
Anonymous
Just being semantic, and pointing out a defense that the official did not lie at the school board meeting when he denied a record of assault in restrooms. |
Anonymous
That makes sense. My real objection is when colleges start meting out punishments with their kangaroo courts. |
Anonymous
OP here. I agree that's a problem since these boys tend to get away with rape. But can we please keep this focused on what happened in these high schools? The very fact that the victim(s) and assailants were juveniles certainly complicated things. While I'm convinced LCPS had a circle-the-wagons mentality and an impulse to protect the institution rather than the children, I also do believe their hands were tied in many ways about what they could or could not say, particularly when LCSO actually began an investigation. |