LCPS sexual assualt - who is held accountable?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The bathroom thing is now VA law. It’s not up to LCPS. (I still despise LCPS and think they handled this absolutely terribly on so many levels, but they have no say over transgender bathrooms.)

https://wset.com/news/local/virginia-transgender-student-policy-gives-school-boards-little-say

There were a couple of posts above that said a boy can't just put on a skirt and walk in the girl's bathroom. They're wrong. A boy can absolutely do this and no one is authorized to ask if they are really trans - because the only requirement for being deemed trans is to say you are. Period.

Yup. People are not allowed to question these boys or men and they know it. Some posters said that no one probably saw the boy going into the bathroom...but with the law in place you could have 3 dozen adults watching this boy walk into the bathroom and not one is allowed to ask his intentions. Hell the girl was probably uncomfortable when she saw him, but didn't dare speak out for being labeled trans-phobic and disciplined.

Please quote the part of the law or school policy that says you can’t question a boy who has consistently identified as a boy if he enters the girls’ bathroom. I read the LCPS policy and saw nothing of the sort.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem here is that LCPS and the principal didn’t do anything about it because they didn’t want to be viewed as anti trans. Instead the girls father filed a police report. The school refused to do so and ended up transferring the kid to another school where he/she then assaulted another girl.

The first part of this is not true. The SRO was immediately informed. LCPS, the Sheriff's office, and even Scott Smith (the girl's father) agree on this point.

I have just published a FAQ and Timeline gathering as much information as I could about this with links to related reporting:

https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1007838.page

Thank you. The timeline is very helpful and thorough.

[Anonymous]

Please quote the part of the law or school policy that says you can’t question a boy who has consistently identified as a boy if he enters the girls’ bathroom. I read the LCPS policy and saw nothing of the sort.

I cannot speak for Loudoun, but I watched a FCPS Board discussion on this. I THINK it was when Schultz was still on the Board and wanted some type of formal "assignment." FCPS pretty much left it up to self identity, I think. It's a very confusing issue to me. I understand the need to be compassionate and accepting, but this situation is just what some parents feared.

I've no idea about the perpetrator in this case. The fact that there was another attack makes me believe the first victim. And, I also believe that there are boys who would take advantage of the opportunity--not trans girls, but boys with an agenda.

I'm on the "third" option camp--use an alternative bathroom. I also have a lot of difficulty with biological males playing girls' sports and sharing locker rooms.

I think there are still a lot of gaps in the story. One report said that it was the dad who insisted on getting sheriff to come to the school--that school had wanted to handle it 'in house." Remember, the school administration sent out a letter to parents advising them of the upheaval with a parent--but not that there was an accusation of an attack.

Was there a bias at the school to believe the "gender fluid" perpetrator because of political correctness? I' don't know.

I also don't believe that some SB members had not heard anything about it. It was interesting that at the June 22 meeting, that one SB member asked if there were assaults in the bathrooms on a "regular" basis-or words to effect. But, "regular" or "regularly" was definitely in her question.

It defies believability to me that some --and maybe all--SB members were not aware that something had happened.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The bathroom thing is now VA law. It’s not up to LCPS. (I still despise LCPS and think they handled this absolutely terribly on so many levels, but they have no say over transgender bathrooms.)

https://wset.com/news/local/virginia-transgender-student-policy-gives-school-boards-little-say

There were a couple of posts above that said a boy can't just put on a skirt and walk in the girl's bathroom. They're wrong. A boy can absolutely do this and no one is authorized to ask if they are really trans - because the only requirement for being deemed trans is to say you are. Period.

Yup. People are not allowed to question these boys or men and they know it. Some posters said that no one probably saw the boy going into the bathroom...but with the law in place you could have 3 dozen adults watching this boy walk into the bathroom and not one is allowed to ask his intentions. Hell the girl was probably uncomfortable when she saw him, but didn't dare speak out for being labeled trans-phobic and disciplined.

Please quote the part of the law or school policy that says you can’t question a boy who has consistently identified as a boy if he enters the girls’ bathroom. I read the LCPS policy and saw nothing of the sort.

No teacher would risk getting fired by questioning a student's gender identity.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:No teacher would risk getting fired by questioning a student's gender identity.

That’s not true. A Loudoun teacher refused to use students’ preferred pronouns and was fired. A judge then ordered him to be rehired.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The bathroom thing is now VA law. It’s not up to LCPS. (I still despise LCPS and think they handled this absolutely terribly on so many levels, but they have no say over transgender bathrooms.)

https://wset.com/news/local/virginia-transgender-student-policy-gives-school-boards-little-say

There were a couple of posts above that said a boy can't just put on a skirt and walk in the girl's bathroom. They're wrong. A boy can absolutely do this and no one is authorized to ask if they are really trans - because the only requirement for being deemed trans is to say you are. Period.

Yup. People are not allowed to question these boys or men and they know it. Some posters said that no one probably saw the boy going into the bathroom...but with the law in place you could have 3 dozen adults watching this boy walk into the bathroom and not one is allowed to ask his intentions. Hell the girl was probably uncomfortable when she saw him, but didn't dare speak out for being labeled trans-phobic and disciplined.

Please quote the part of the law or school policy that says you can’t question a boy who has consistently identified as a boy if he enters the girls’ bathroom. I read the LCPS policy and saw nothing of the sort.

At the school board where this policy was discussed/debated/adopted, several of the school board members wanted to amend the policy to put in place clear guidelines as to who (whom?) this policy was put in place to protect versus an open ended free for all. They were denied in their quest.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The bathroom thing is now VA law. It’s not up to LCPS. (I still despise LCPS and think they handled this absolutely terribly on so many levels, but they have no say over transgender bathrooms.)

https://wset.com/news/local/virginia-transgender-student-policy-gives-school-boards-little-say

There were a couple of posts above that said a boy can't just put on a skirt and walk in the girl's bathroom. They're wrong. A boy can absolutely do this and no one is authorized to ask if they are really trans - because the only requirement for being deemed trans is to say you are. Period.

Yup. People are not allowed to question these boys or men and they know it. Some posters said that no one probably saw the boy going into the bathroom...but with the law in place you could have 3 dozen adults watching this boy walk into the bathroom and not one is allowed to ask his intentions. Hell the girl was probably uncomfortable when she saw him, but didn't dare speak out for being labeled trans-phobic and disciplined.

Please quote the part of the law or school policy that says you can’t question a boy who has consistently identified as a boy if he enters the girls’ bathroom. I read the LCPS policy and saw nothing of the sort.

https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/loudoun/Board.nsf/files/C5SKU952786E/$file/Policy%208040%2C%20RIGHTS%20OF%20TRANSGENDER%20AND%20GENDER-EXPANSIVE%20STUDENTS%20(June%208%2C%202021).pdf


LCPS staff shall allow gender-expansive or transgender students to use their
18 chosen name and gender pronouns that reflect their gender identity without any
19 substantiating evidence, regardless of the name and gender recorded in the student’s
20 permanent educational record.

All students are entitled to have access to restrooms and locker rooms that are
50 sanitary, safe, and adequate, so that they can comfortably and fully engage in their
51 school programs and activities. Students should be allowed to use the facility that
52 corresponds to their gender identity.

So anyone, at any time, without substantiating evidence, can identify however they want.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem here is that LCPS and the principal didn’t do anything about it because they didn’t want to be viewed as anti trans. Instead the girls father filed a police report. The school refused to do so and ended up transferring the kid to another school where he/she then assaulted another girl.

The first part of this is not true. The SRO was immediately informed. LCPS, the Sheriff's office, and even Scott Smith (the girl's father) agree on this point.

I have just published a FAQ and Timeline gathering as much information as I could about this with links to related reporting:

https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1007838.page

He gave an interview saying that he was kept outside because he didn’t have an ID. They let his wife in without him (don’t get me started). His wife said they would not let their daughter speak so she spoke to her mother via hand signals when they weren’t looking. Otherwise the mother would not know she had been raped until later. If the SRO was immediately informed AND a proper report was made by the school stating sexual assault, it would have been treated more seriously. Instead the school denied rape occurred, and furthermore did not notify the parents at the school it even occurred

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem here is that LCPS and the principal didn’t do anything about it because they didn’t want to be viewed as anti trans. Instead the girls father filed a police report. The school refused to do so and ended up transferring the kid to another school where he/she then assaulted another girl.

The first part of this is not true. The SRO was immediately informed. LCPS, the Sheriff's office, and even Scott Smith (the girl's father) agree on this point.

I have just published a FAQ and Timeline gathering as much information as I could about this with links to related reporting:

https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1007838.page

Thank you. The timeline is very helpful and thorough.

And incomplete. He forgot about the part where activists were bussed in and it was one of those activists who started harassing Smith’s wife at the meeting, calling her a liar, etc. Smith came to his wife’s defense. Activist had no consequences, of course, despite her behavior. This was reported by an eyewitness at the meeting.

[Anonymous]

And incomplete. He forgot about the part where activists were bussed in and it was one of those activists who started harassing Smith’s wife at the meeting, calling her a liar, etc. Smith came to his wife’s defense. Activist had no consequences, of course, despite her behavior. This was reported by an eyewitness at the meeting.

I haven't read anything about the activist being bused in. I thought it was someone that the Smith's already knew. Pretty sure she had a daughter the same age. She told Smith she didn't believe his daughter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

And incomplete. He forgot about the part where activists were bussed in and it was one of those activists who started harassing Smith’s wife at the meeting, calling her a liar, etc. Smith came to his wife’s defense. Activist had no consequences, of course, despite her behavior. This was reported by an eyewitness at the meeting.

I haven't read anything about the activist being bused in. I thought it was someone that the Smith's already knew. Pretty sure she had a daughter the same age. She told Smith she didn't believe his daughter.

That's appalling. His daughter was raped, but this lady was more interested in her agenda???

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem here is that LCPS and the principal didn’t do anything about it because they didn’t want to be viewed as anti trans. Instead the girls father filed a police report. The school refused to do so and ended up transferring the kid to another school where he/she then assaulted another girl.

The first part of this is not true. The SRO was immediately informed. LCPS, the Sheriff's office, and even Scott Smith (the girl's father) agree on this point.

I have just published a FAQ and Timeline gathering as much information as I could about this with links to related reporting:

https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1007838.page

He gave an interview saying that he was kept outside because he didn’t have an ID. They let his wife in without him (don’t get me started). His wife said they would not let their daughter speak so she spoke to her mother via hand signals when they weren’t looking. Otherwise the mother would not know she had been raped until later. If the SRO was immediately informed AND a proper report was made by the school stating sexual assault, it would have been treated more seriously. Instead the school denied rape occurred, and furthermore did not notify the parents at the school it even occurred

If you have a link to that interview, I would like to take a look at it and add to my document if necessary. All parties involved agree that the SRO was immediately informed and it appears from the Sheriff's Office statement that a proper report was made and an investigation started:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/loudoun-schools-sex-assault-allegations/2021/10/13/02d3f144-2c61-11ec-8ef6-3ca8fe943a92_story.html

...the sheriff’s office said one of its school resource officers was notified of the alleged assault the same day and an investigation was quickly started. Officials said it was conducted over several weeks by the sheriff’s office Special Victims Unit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

And incomplete. He forgot about the part where activists were bussed in and it was one of those activists who started harassing Smith’s wife at the meeting, calling her a liar, etc. Smith came to his wife’s defense. Activist had no consequences, of course, despite her behavior. This was reported by an eyewitness at the meeting.

I haven't read anything about the activist being bused in. I thought it was someone that the Smith's already knew. Pretty sure she had a daughter the same age. She told Smith she didn't believe his daughter.

I live here. Activists were bussed in.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No teacher would risk getting fired by questioning a student's gender identity.

That’s not true. A Loudoun teacher refused to use students’ preferred pronouns and was fired. A judge then ordered him to be rehired.

Seriously - who wants to go through all that??

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The problem here is that LCPS and the principal didn’t do anything about it because they didn’t want to be viewed as anti trans. Instead the girls father filed a police report. The school refused to do so and ended up transferring the kid to another school where he/she then assaulted another girl.

The first part of this is not true. The SRO was immediately informed. LCPS, the Sheriff's office, and even Scott Smith (the girl's father) agree on this point.

I have just published a FAQ and Timeline gathering as much information as I could about this with links to related reporting:

https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1007838.page

He gave an interview saying that he was kept outside because he didn’t have an ID. They let his wife in without him (don’t get me started). His wife said they would not let their daughter speak so she spoke to her mother via hand signals when they weren’t looking. Otherwise the mother would not know she had been raped until later. If the SRO was immediately informed AND a proper report was made by the school stating sexual assault, it would have been treated more seriously. Instead the school denied rape occurred, and furthermore did not notify the parents at the school it even occurred

If you have a link to that interview, I would like to take a look at it and add to my document if necessary. All parties involved agree that the SRO was immediately informed and it appears from the Sheriff's Office statement that a proper report was made and an investigation started:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/loudoun-schools-sex-assault-allegations/2021/10/13/02d3f144-2c61-11ec-8ef6-3ca8fe943a92_story.html

...the sheriff’s office said one of its school resource officers was notified of the alleged assault the same day and an investigation was quickly started. Officials said it was conducted over several weeks by the sheriff’s office Special Victims Unit.

It was radio today. I have to find it. You hand me the WaPo but don’t believe the Daily Wire and Rosiak? You would know more if you broadened your horizons a bit. The investigation started internally. It was the rape kit/hospital visit that put the true investigation into action that same day.