What is going on at Sidwell is NOT just a “sex scandal”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How was DCUM cited in a lawsuit if it's anonymous? Did posts on DCUM effect anything in the lawsuit ?

As part of his campaign against his wife and her boyfriend psychologist, the dad hired a PR firm to spread the word about the embarrassing materials in his complaint. The PR work included posting stuff here on DCUM. The dad admitted this in deposition, and it was discussed in one of the underlying court documents. The appeals ruling refers to it obliquely without citing DCUM directly. IIRC, Jeff also spotted and named the PR firm when it was planting posts stuff here.

Marrying an asshoke lawyer & having kids with him seems like a great idea.

There is so much ridiculous misinformation on this thread and it should be deleted. That said, Jeff won't delete it, how many little kids are hurt by the publicity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How was DCUM cited in a lawsuit if it's anonymous? Did posts on DCUM effect anything in the lawsuit ?

As part of his campaign against his wife and her boyfriend psychologist, the dad hired a PR firm to spread the word about the embarrassing materials in his complaint. The PR work included posting stuff here on DCUM. The dad admitted this in deposition, and it was discussed in one of the underlying court documents. The appeals ruling refers to it obliquely without citing DCUM directly. IIRC, Jeff also spotted and named the PR firm when it was planting posts stuff here.

Marrying an asshoke lawyer & having kids with him seems like a great idea.

There is so much ridiculous misinformation on this thread and it should be deleted. That said, Jeff won't delete it, how many little kids are hurt by the publicity.

*no matter how

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also -How was DCUM cited in a lawsuit if it's anonymous? Did posts on DCUM effect anything in the lawsuit ?

The father started one or more threads here bashing the mother, psychologist, and school. These threads were anonymous and disparaged identifiable individuals. According to documents filed in the case, the father first lied about being the author of the posts, but later admitted it. Copies of the thread(s) (I don't remember if there were more than one) were included with the filings.

And the posts earlier in this same thread, by the mother, disparaging the father? No comment on those?

Which posts are those? Can you identify them? Or are you just speculating? I've never seen reference in any of the court documents to the mother posting here (although it wouldn't surprise me).

Are you the father? The court documents make it pretty clear he's done some pretty terrible things. Why are you so intent on defending someone like that?

Are you for real? The posts on page 6 and 7 identifying the dad by name and directed at him?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm sorry. The site administrator just posted this link to a story that happened 2-3 years ago? Save us the time and trouble of reading the attachment, what is the intent of your post?

I'm not a lawyer so I don't feel confident trying to explain the document which reports an important ruling in the case. My very layman understanding which may be 180 degrees from reality is that a lower court's summary judgement was upheld on appeal in all but two cases. As a result, the former school psychologist's case against the aggrieved father can now proceed.

Jeff: As an appellate lawyer, I have two observations. Your understanding of the holding of the case is close enough to be considered accurate in layman's terms. Your terminology is anything but neutral.
As a DCUMer, I would have preferred you started a new thread here (and link the old threads) but I understand it's your show.

Not to mention that the father (in his 60s) has custody of the two girls and raises them alone. Imagine how hard it would be to get that, and what the other side must look like.

To pp - Jeff has a biased interest in this case. Trust me.

please - if you are very wealthy and have managed to create a situation where your ex looks bad because her private emails were leaked, it's probably not that hard to get custody.

[Anonymous]

Were the psychologists children kicked out of Sidwell with him?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How was DCUM cited in a lawsuit if it's anonymous? Did posts on DCUM effect anything in the lawsuit ?

As part of his campaign against his wife and her boyfriend psychologist, the dad hired a PR firm to spread the word about the embarrassing materials in his complaint. The PR work included posting stuff here on DCUM. The dad admitted this in deposition, and it was discussed in one of the underlying court documents. The appeals ruling refers to it obliquely without citing DCUM directly. IIRC, Jeff also spotted and named the PR firm when it was planting posts stuff here.

Marrying an asshoke lawyer & having kids with him seems like a great idea.

There is so much ridiculous misinformation on this thread and it should be deleted. That said, Jeff won't delete it, how many little kids are hurt by the publicity.

It's been in and will again be in Washingtonian magazine. Who do you think put it there?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also -How was DCUM cited in a lawsuit if it's anonymous? Did posts on DCUM effect anything in the lawsuit ?

The father started one or more threads here bashing the mother, psychologist, and school. These threads were anonymous and disparaged identifiable individuals. According to documents filed in the case, the father first lied about being the author of the posts, but later admitted it. Copies of the thread(s) (I don't remember if there were more than one) were included with the filings.

And the posts earlier in this same thread, by the mother, disparaging the father? No comment on those?

Which posts are those? Can you identify them? Or are you just speculating? I've never seen reference in any of the court documents to the mother posting here (although it wouldn't surprise me).

Are you the father? The court documents make it pretty clear he's done some pretty terrible things. Why are you so intent on defending someone like that?

Are you for real? The posts on page 6 and 7 identifying the dad by name and directed at him?

Seems pretty tit-for-tat to me in those posts where the father and someone (probably the mother) are duking it out. I still don't get why you are playing his bodyguard here, especially over posts from pages 6-7 which are two-and-a-half years old. Given many of his activities the appeals court described, I don't have any sympathy left for him. He didn't like his ex-wife's new boyfriend, so he used his wealth to try to hurt them, regardless of the impact on his daughters. What kind of person does that?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Also -How was DCUM cited in a lawsuit if it's anonymous? Did posts on DCUM effect anything in the lawsuit ?

The father started one or more threads here bashing the mother, psychologist, and school. These threads were anonymous and disparaged identifiable individuals. According to documents filed in the case, the father first lied about being the author of the posts, but later admitted it. Copies of the thread(s) (I don't remember if there were more than one) were included with the filings.

And the posts earlier in this same thread, by the mother, disparaging the father? No comment on those?

Which posts are those? Can you identify them? Or are you just speculating? I've never seen reference in any of the court documents to the mother posting here (although it wouldn't surprise me).

Are you the father? The court documents make it pretty clear he's done some pretty terrible things. Why are you so intent on defending someone like that?

Are you for real? The posts on page 6 and 7 identifying the dad by name and directed at him?

Seems pretty tit-for-tat to me in those posts where the father and someone (probably the mother) are duking it out. I still don't get why you are playing his bodyguard here, especially over posts from pages 6-7 which are two-and-a-half years old. Given many of his activities the appeals court described, I don't have any sympathy left for him. He didn't like his ex-wife's new boyfriend, so he used his wealth to try to hurt them, regardless of the impact on his daughters. What kind of person does that?

You have NO IDEA what you're talking about. It's comical, really. What matters is the impact on the children. They are fabulous, and he has been the one raising them for the last five years. Think what you will. And no, I'm not him.

[Anonymous]

^is this the new love interest, or the PR intern ( or both -wouldn't that be juicy!!!)

[Anonymous]

So these girls live in Florida and you are monitoring on a message board for parents in DC?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^is this the new love interest, or the PR intern ( or both -wouldn't that be juicy!!!)

Huh?

[Anonymous]

Why is this even a thread? Seriously. Question the motives of whoever drudged this up again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why is this even a thread? Seriously. Question the motives of whoever drudged this up again.

That would be Jeff.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why is this even a thread? Seriously. Question the motives of whoever drudged this up again.

That would be Jeff. And absolutely question the motives.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is this even a thread? Seriously. Question the motives of whoever drudged this up again.

That would be Jeff. And absolutely question the motives.

Why are you posting multiple replies and constantly attacking me? Don't you realize that every time you reply you bump the thread? Where was your concern about the children when the father started all of this? Where was your concern when his PR agent was contacting me to encourage me to publicize the story? I still have her emails. Would you like to see them?