GDS Student Newspaper posts about the horrible incident

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would imagine that the school needs to have a reason for expelling a student and allegations of rape, that did not have enough evidence to make an arrest, is not going to fly. The law suit threat is real.

I am surprised that the kids that were investigated are still there, I would think the families would want to leave and the school would be happy to let them go. But maybe it is hard to find a school with the investigation shadow.

It's my understanding that no kids were ever questioned about it. They don't know who did it. No suspects.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“To be clear, according to the MPD, the case was thoroughly investigated and there is no evidence to substantiate the allegations put forth by the former family.”

Shameful and a disgrace. MPD is notorious for not believing survivors of violence. I hope this gets the attention of the Mayor and the city. Children don’t make this stuff up. My thoughts are with the family for their brave decision to come forward in a very public way.

Completely agree.

Someone here is lying. The family says that MPD found the child's allegations to be credible; GDS says they did not. So which is it? That part should be easy to discern and should be made public.

Well, the parents said this, and then the school responds publicly -- "Though we cooperated and were interviewed by a third party investigator hired by GDS, they have not shared the investigative report with us."

This is normal. Unless there is a subpoena or legal requirement, such reports are generally not shared, and even though only parts of it may be. I'm guessing GDS provided a summary of the findings, but not the full report. Generally the full reports contain a lot of sensitive information, including statements that cannot be corroborated, and interviewees are often promised confidentiality as a condition for cooperating with the investigation. Given the small size of the school, confidentiality may be impossible to guarantee if shared with the victim's family. It's frustrating for the family who is suffering, but not turning over the complete investigative report should not be interpreted as nefarious on the part of GDS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would be inclined to believe a huge range of abuse and sexual assault stories in middle school, but this one seems very implausible.

1) That they were able to mask their identities. It's a small school. Did they change clothes?

2) I could see an SA happening as part of hazing or something like that, but then there's no way other students wouldn't have known about it on some level, if not the details

3) Even if I could stretch to believe one very clever, secretive, deviant child predator...two? Who found each other and planned this and managed to keep their mouths shut for years, including during an investigation?

I'm not saying nothing bad happened to this kid, and I want them to be supported, but I seriously doubt this tale.

The more I've thought about this scenario, the more I've begun to agree with PP's perspective.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would be inclined to believe a huge range of abuse and sexual assault stories in middle school, but this one seems very implausible.

1) That they were able to mask their identities. It's a small school. Did they change clothes?

2) I could see an SA happening as part of hazing or something like that, but then there's no way other students wouldn't have known about it on some level, if not the details

3) Even if I could stretch to believe one very clever, secretive, deviant child predator...two? Who found each other and planned this and managed to keep their mouths shut for years, including during an investigation?

I'm not saying nothing bad happened to this kid, and I want them to be supported, but I seriously doubt this tale.

The more I've thought about this scenario, the more I've begun to agree with PP's perspective.

That is the more comfortable way to think about it but I disagree with virtually all of the reasoning. It is closed off, narrow thinking and skewed. But it’s certainly a more comfortable place to land so I understand why people will be drawn to it.

[Anonymous]

According to the Bit,

"An MPD spokesperson told the Bit that the department closed the case because MPD detectives could not find credible leads. The spokesperson said the department would reopen the case if the department received new, credible evidence."

This is sadly the case with reams of cases in DC. No "credible leads" and the case is closed. That doesn't mean they didn't find the child credible. It means they couldn't find other credible leads. What kind of other credible leads could Kavanaugh's accusers find after so many years? Should she even have been allowed to testify then?

[Anonymous]

The likelihood of having 2 rapists doing the work simultaneously is very low, but if it happened you would have seen the 2 kids making trouble in other things as well.

It could be that the kid was bullied and he made up the rape story to leave the school.

Not saying that nothing bad happened, but the incident might have been distorted.

If a kid was actually raped in a bathroom there would have been pain involved that would have been noticed the same day or stains or signs of attack. You don’t need a kid necessarily to tell you this to notice that something goes off.

If a rape happened it was committed in a very tidy way to be done by teenagers.

[Anonymous]

Is the head of school going to resign? What about the pattern of kids getting ambushed in the bathroom?

[Anonymous]

If I were a GDS parent I would support the school in denying any wrongdoing in order to h avoid any liability and avoid paying the family compensation for the incident. Specially if there is no hard evidence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is the head of school going to resign? What about the pattern of kids getting ambushed in the bathroom?

Is this a regular thing ? Is there physical aggression involved? I don’t know the answer that’s why I am asking .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If I were a GDS parent I would support the school in denying any wrongdoing in order to h avoid any liability and avoid paying the family compensation for the incident. Specially if there is no hard evidence.

You have it backwards. If there were any hint of this actually having happened the school would have paid (its insurance actually) asap. The blunt fact is that this attack was fabricated by the child and then magnified by the parent/s. There are so many examples of this (Washington Hebrew for one). The rape never happened - this is obvious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If I were a GDS parent I would support the school in denying any wrongdoing in order to h avoid any liability and avoid paying the family compensation for the incident. Specially if there is no hard evidence.

You have it backwards. If there were any hint of this actually having happened the school would have paid (its insurance actually) asap. The blunt fact is that this attack was fabricated by the child and then magnified by the parent/s. There are so many examples of this (Washington Hebrew for one). The rape never happened - this is obvious.

You really don’t know enough to conclude that. You just don’t want to believe the victim.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If I were a GDS parent I would support the school in denying any wrongdoing in order to h avoid any liability and avoid paying the family compensation for the incident. Specially if there is no hard evidence.

You have it backwards. If there were any hint of this actually having happened the school would have paid (its insurance actually) asap. The blunt fact is that this attack was fabricated by the child and then magnified by the parent/s. There are so many examples of this (Washington Hebrew for one). The rape never happened - this is obvious.

You really don’t know enough to conclude that. You just don’t want to believe the victim.

I think it’s pretty clear. And no, I don’t think an abstraction like “believe victims” should be used to assess situations like this. It sounds like they believed the victim to an appropriate degree (ie open an investigation) and found nothing credible. Purported victims don’t have some kind of never-ending presumption of credibility in all cases.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If I were a GDS parent I would support the school in denying any wrongdoing in order to h avoid any liability and avoid paying the family compensation for the incident. Specially if there is no hard evidence.

You have it backwards. If there were any hint of this actually having happened the school would have paid (its insurance actually) asap. The blunt fact is that this attack was fabricated by the child and then magnified by the parent/s. There are so many examples of this (Washington Hebrew for one). The rape never happened - this is obvious.

You really don’t know enough to conclude that. You just don’t want to believe the victim.

I think it’s pretty clear. And no, I don’t think an abstraction like “believe victims” should be used to assess situations like this. It sounds like they believed the victim to an appropriate degree (ie open an investigation) and found nothing credible. Purported victims don’t have some kind of never-ending presumption of credibility in all cases.

I agree with that, but a the same time the school doesn’t seem to have much empathy with the incident or intentions to reinforce protocol to prevent a similar scenario in the future. Family is wrong school is right.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If I were a GDS parent I would support the school in denying any wrongdoing in order to h avoid any liability and avoid paying the family compensation for the incident. Specially if there is no hard evidence.

You have it backwards. If there were any hint of this actually having happened the school would have paid (its insurance actually) asap. The blunt fact is that this attack was fabricated by the child and then magnified by the parent/s. There are so many examples of this (Washington Hebrew for one). The rape never happened - this is obvious.

You really don’t know enough to conclude that. You just don’t want to believe the victim.

I think it’s pretty clear. And no, I don’t think an abstraction like “believe victims” should be used to assess situations like this. It sounds like they believed the victim to an appropriate degree (ie open an investigation) and found nothing credible. Purported victims don’t have some kind of never-ending presumption of credibility in all cases.

I agree with that, but a the same time the school doesn’t seem to have much empathy with the incident or intentions to reinforce protocol to prevent a similar scenario in the future. Family is wrong school is right.

The incident being a false allegation? Yes I imagine the school is now going to install cameras to protect itself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If I were a GDS parent I would support the school in denying any wrongdoing in order to h avoid any liability and avoid paying the family compensation for the incident. Specially if there is no hard evidence.

You have it backwards. If there were any hint of this actually having happened the school would have paid (its insurance actually) asap. The blunt fact is that this attack was fabricated by the child and then magnified by the parent/s. There are so many examples of this (Washington Hebrew for one). The rape never happened - this is obvious.

You really don’t know enough to conclude that. You just don’t want to believe the victim.

I think it’s pretty clear. And no, I don’t think an abstraction like “believe victims” should be used to assess situations like this. It sounds like they believed the victim to an appropriate degree (ie open an investigation) and found nothing credible. Purported victims don’t have some kind of never-ending presumption of credibility in all cases.

I agree with that, but a the same time the school doesn’t seem to have much empathy with the incident or intentions to reinforce protocol to prevent a similar scenario in the future. Family is wrong school is right.

The incident being a false allegation? Yes I imagine the school is now going to install cameras to protect itself.

Would you stop gaslighting? The victim was a small child.