LCPS sexual assualt - who is held accountable?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Should we make unisex classrooms to be sure boys can't sexually assault people in the class?

I have no idea why, no matter how you feel about trans people, you all are conflating trans and opportunistic predators? Are you really that awful you would use this to make a cheap political point?

Where are you all yelling about bathrooms when boys are assaulted by other boys in unisex bathrooms, or girls by other girls? Because this happens a lot.

Or what about this case? https://13wham.com/news/local/gates-chili-student-facing-rape-criminal-sex-act-charges

No trans issue here....

You are equating classrooms to bathrooms? Classrooms that have adult supervision with bathrooms where the kids are on their own? You don't understand the difference?

Wasn't the boy in question here accused of assaulting another girl in a classroom? I believe he was. Also, how about you address the substance of the argument?

The May 28 rape was in a bathroom. The victim had told her father that the boy was "wearing a skirt".

So, the first incident was back in May. Almost 5 months ago. And the first time it’s covered by WTOP is yesterday?

Why didn’t this story get more local media coverage? That is mind-boggling to me.

That is the whole point of this thread. People are getting side tracked on separate issues that are indirectly related to this.

[Anonymous]

So, people who are in favor of the bathroom policy and who were suspicious of this story when it was only reported by right-wing news sources: do you think it's appropriate for administrators to hush up this rape until after the policy was passed? I assume you believe (1) that it being in a bathroom was irrelevant, and (2) that it being in a bathroom would nevertheless have frightened and upset parents and school board members to the point that the policy probably wouldn't have passed. Do you think that was the right call?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is it possible that at the time of the board meeting where Smith was arrested, the board actually didn’t know about the assault? I assume the superintendent knew, so perhaps my point doesn’t matter. But it’s possible the board really thought Smith was crazy because they didn’t know about the assault, and would’ve acted differently if they knew.

It's possible regarding the board. But, when discussing the new trans policy, the school board specifically asked the superintendent about any instances of assault in attempt to allay any parent fears. LCPS Superintendent Scott Ziegler declared that to his knowledge, "we don’t have any record of assaults occurring in our restrooms." This meeting took place on June 22, almost a month after the first assault (in the school bathroom) took place.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Should we make unisex classrooms to be sure boys can't sexually assault people in the class?

I have no idea why, no matter how you feel about trans people, you all are conflating trans and opportunistic predators? Are you really that awful you would use this to make a cheap political point?

Where are you all yelling about bathrooms when boys are assaulted by other boys in unisex bathrooms, or girls by other girls? Because this happens a lot.

Or what about this case? https://13wham.com/news/local/gates-chili-student-facing-rape-criminal-sex-act-charges

No trans issue here....

You are equating classrooms to bathrooms? Classrooms that have adult supervision with bathrooms where the kids are on their own? You don't understand the difference?

Wasn't the boy in question here accused of assaulting another girl in a classroom? I believe he was. Also, how about you address the substance of the argument?

The May 28 rape was in a bathroom. The victim had told her father that the boy was "wearing a skirt".

So, the first incident was back in May. Almost 5 months ago. And the first time it’s covered by WTOP is yesterday?

Why didn’t this story get more local media coverage? That is mind-boggling to me.

From what I read Loudoun county law enforcement asked the schools not to investigate while they ran DNA testing but then could not get that done in time so released the accused rapist. Seems like a major law enforcement and prosecutor failure. Any news on rape kit backlogs in Loudoun?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it possible that at the time of the board meeting where Smith was arrested, the board actually didn’t know about the assault? I assume the superintendent knew, so perhaps my point doesn’t matter. But it’s possible the board really thought Smith was crazy because they didn’t know about the assault, and would’ve acted differently if they knew.

It's possible regarding the board. But, when discussing the new trans policy, the school board specifically asked the superintendent about any instances of assault in attempt to allay any parent fears. LCPS Superintendent Scott Ziegler declared that to his knowledge, "we don’t have any record of assaults occurring in our restrooms." This meeting took place on June 22, almost a month after the first assault (in the school bathroom) took place.

I think the million dollar question is how much did Ziegler know. If he knew about the (alleged) rape, then he should resign. Also, where is the Stone Bridge principal in all of this??? Principal: Timothy Flynn

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it possible that at the time of the board meeting where Smith was arrested, the board actually didn’t know about the assault? I assume the superintendent knew, so perhaps my point doesn’t matter. But it’s possible the board really thought Smith was crazy because they didn’t know about the assault, and would’ve acted differently if they knew.

It's possible regarding the board. But, when discussing the new trans policy, the school board specifically asked the superintendent about any instances of assault in attempt to allay any parent fears. LCPS Superintendent Scott Ziegler declared that to his knowledge, "we don’t have any record of assaults occurring in our restrooms." This meeting took place on June 22, almost a month after the first assault (in the school bathroom) took place.

I think the million dollar question is how much did Ziegler know. If he knew about the (alleged) rape, then he should resign. Also, where is the Stone Bridge principal in all of this??? Principal: Timothy Flynn

If he didn't know, he's out of touch and should resign

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree, but you know trans advocates will reject it as stigmatizing.

I am fairly certain this is what happened when this issue was raised. The fact that we need to honor the fact that trans girls think they are ‘girls’ and feel the need to be allowed into the girls’ bathroom in order to feel validated.

Precisely. Activists won’t accept anything but total inclusion.

[Anonymous]

My child attends Stone Bridge, we received an email that the police were called because a parent was acting agressive toward the Staff. There was no mention of a possible rape.
We did not receive any notification about an assault or rape at anytime from Stone Bridge High School or the Sheriffs office, even after they charge the male student some weeks later.

We did receive notice of the assault and rape at Broad Run High School on the day that it was reported. We receive an email from the LCPS and a notice from the Sheriff's office was posted on Facebook and other places.

I am less concerned about the bathrooms as the second assault/rape was in a classroom. My concern is why was he in school to be allowed the opportunity to do this a second time? And why were we not informed of the assault and rape at Stone Bridge?

I want answers from the Stone Bridge principal, the Superintendant and the School Board. I am appalled by their actions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can anyone explain why the bathroom debate is still happening, when it appears to have absolutely no relevance to the assaults?

Excellent question. It seems there are far more relevant issues at hand re: this case.

Because there seems to be the idea that LCPS hid info about the initial assault because it involved a boy (who may or may not have been wearing a skirt) assaulting a girl in a restroom...while a huge debate was going on about transgender access to restrooms. So, the optics here arent good.
I agree, the issue to me is that 2 sexual assaults occurred, perpetrated by the same boy, and there was what appears to be a cover up. But, based on the ongoing transgender bathroom debate, that has turned into the focus here.

No one here is trying to attack transgender people so get a grip. It appears the school may have wanted to sweep this assault under the rug because they knew it would be used against them since they were debating the transgender policy. Whether the boy was transgender or not from the father's account he was wearing a skirt when the assault happened in the girl's bathroom. Of course if parents knew this many of them would have flipped out at the school board meeting that took place a few weeks after the attack.

Where did I say transgender people were being attacked?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Should we make unisex classrooms to be sure boys can't sexually assault people in the class?

I have no idea why, no matter how you feel about trans people, you all are conflating trans and opportunistic predators? Are you really that awful you would use this to make a cheap political point?

Where are you all yelling about bathrooms when boys are assaulted by other boys in unisex bathrooms, or girls by other girls? Because this happens a lot.

Or what about this case? https://13wham.com/news/local/gates-chili-student-facing-rape-criminal-sex-act-charges

No trans issue here....

Let’s watch what happens if a boy sexually assaults a girl in a classroom occupied by other guys. He’d be lucky to live.

Girls deserve a safe space. So do trans people. They don’t have to be the same space.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Should we make unisex classrooms to be sure boys can't sexually assault people in the class?

I have no idea why, no matter how you feel about trans people, you all are conflating trans and opportunistic predators? Are you really that awful you would use this to make a cheap political point?

Where are you all yelling about bathrooms when boys are assaulted by other boys in unisex bathrooms, or girls by other girls? Because this happens a lot.

Or what about this case? https://13wham.com/news/local/gates-chili-student-facing-rape-criminal-sex-act-charges

No trans issue here....

You know why. The same reason that people conflate pedophiles and gay men.

So do books in the school libraries, apparently

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Should we make unisex classrooms to be sure boys can't sexually assault people in the class?

I have no idea why, no matter how you feel about trans people, you all are conflating trans and opportunistic predators? Are you really that awful you would use this to make a cheap political point?

Where are you all yelling about bathrooms when boys are assaulted by other boys in unisex bathrooms, or girls by other girls? Because this happens a lot.

Or what about this case? https://13wham.com/news/local/gates-chili-student-facing-rape-criminal-sex-act-charges

No trans issue here....

You are equating classrooms to bathrooms? Classrooms that have adult supervision with bathrooms where the kids are on their own? You don't understand the difference?

Wasn't the boy in question here accused of assaulting another girl in a classroom? I believe he was. Also, how about you address the substance of the argument?

The May 28 rape was in a bathroom. The victim had told her father that the boy was "wearing a skirt".

So, the first incident was back in May. Almost 5 months ago. And the first time it’s covered by WTOP is yesterday?

Why didn’t this story get more local media coverage? That is mind-boggling to me.

Neither law enforcement nor the school spoke about it publicly until the second incident. Perhaps WaPo etc. weren’t willing to run a story until one or both were willing to talk to them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can we please also stop referring to the boy as "transgender" or "gender fluid" - he isn't.

Why? What do you call a boy who wears a skirt and chooses to use the girls bathroom?

Well, I call a trans girl who uses the girls bathroom a girl.

I call a boy who wears a skirt (which hasn't been confirmed yet via the police report) and rapes girls a rapist.

I'm sure you can find different labels, but you can be pro trans and anti rape. I know it's a lot for your little brain to handle.

Why can’t you discuss this without resorting to name-calling?

Honestly? Because living in Loudoun I see so many of you on our Facebook posts and I'm sick of it. Some of us actually know the families and it's pretty shitty for folks to weigh in because Tucker Carlson told them too.

Is it that hard to believe that non-Fox-watching, middle-of-the-road people have concerns about this?

+1 I'm a Democrat. I'm also a rape survivor. I think it's dangerous to make it normal for biological men to just walk into vulnerable places like women's bathrooms and locker rooms unquestioned.

I’m sorry that you were raped. I’m also sorry that it made you an awful human being. What do you think is more risky, a trans girl in a women’s bathroom or a trans girl in a men’s bathroom?

Do you realize you’re putting the well-being of a hypothetical “trans girl” over this very real girl who was brutally raped?

Trans people are at a far, far higher risk. That is what is important.

How many trans girls have been raped by boys in LCPS bathrooms?

And you are precisely why the LCPS board tried to downplay the situation.

Because the thing they promised would never happen happened?

The only thing we know is that a boy assaulted a girl in the girls bathroom. The dad alleges that he “sometimes wears skirts”. Does this mean that this boy made a habit of doing so in order to access the bathroom to assault a girl? No we do not know that. Can we drop the trans hysteria and just focus on the boy and the crime?

Don't you mean the boy, the crime, and the actions of LCPS in covering it up and making the father a scapegoat in his reaction to his daughter's attack? Because I agree with you about the bathroom policy in theory, but not in hurting victims and their families in pursuit of an agenda deemed to be more important.

[Anonymous]

So let me get this straight, the theory here is LCPS buried the assault so they could push through a proposal to allow transgender students to use bathrooms matching their gender rather than sex at birth? That would imply there was no policy at the time of the assault in question allowing a “boy in a skirt” to use the girls bathroom. If that’s the case, why do people think going back to the policy in effect at the time of this assault would prevent similar assaults in the future?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My child attends Stone Bridge, we received an email that the police were called because a parent was acting agressive toward the Staff. There was no mention of a possible rape.
We did not receive any notification about an assault or rape at anytime from Stone Bridge High School or the Sheriffs office, even after they charge the male student some weeks later.

We did receive notice of the assault and rape at Broad Run High School on the day that it was reported. We receive an email from the LCPS and a notice from the Sheriff's office was posted on Facebook and other places.

I am less concerned about the bathrooms as the second assault/rape was in a classroom. My concern is why was he in school to be allowed the opportunity to do this a second time? And why were we not informed of the assault and rape at Stone Bridge?

I want answers from the Stone Bridge principal, the Superintendent and the School Board. I am appalled by their actions.

So, let me get this straight. The Stone Bridge parents have STILL not been officially informed of the "alleged" rape that occurred back in May? No communication from the principal at all? (Except to inform of Smith's arrest)

THIS IS UNACCEPTABLE.