GDS Student Newspaper posts about the horrible incident

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am not a parent at GDS, but at a similar private school. What I have heard is that powerful families are protected at these schools. Fortunately, my kids have never been involved in bad situations, but others that have say that this kid or that kid are untouchable.

Obviously this may or may not be true or may or ma not apply to GDS.

Powerful families being protected is an enormous problem when SA concerns are raised. But the solution to that is to refer all cases to impartial outside authorities, and to let them provide the direction. It's not clear to me if GDS referred this to MPD, or if the parent contacted MPD before telling GDS (which would have been an excellent thing for them to do), but having MPD take the lead was the right thing to do. It does appear that MPD told GDS not to reach out to the community.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am not a parent at GDS, but at a similar private school. What I have heard is that powerful families are protected at these schools. Fortunately, my kids have never been involved in bad situations, but others that have say that this kid or that kid are untouchable.

Obviously this may or may not be true or may or ma not apply to GDS.

Powerful families being protected is an enormous problem when SA concerns are raised. But the solution to that is to refer all cases to impartial outside authorities, and to let them provide the direction. It's not clear to me if GDS referred this to MPD, or if the parent contacted MPD before telling GDS (which would have been an excellent thing for them to do), but having MPD take the lead was the right thing to do. It does appear that MPD told GDS not to reach out to the community.

According to the letter GDS sent, they reported to the MPD and CPS and also hired an independent investigator. That would be referring the case to impartial outside authorities, yes? GDS also, in their follow-up email, said they hired an outside security consultant, and that they increased the number of cameras at the school and keep the recordings longer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am not a parent at GDS, but at a similar private school. What I have heard is that powerful families are protected at these schools. Fortunately, my kids have never been involved in bad situations, but others that have say that this kid or that kid are untouchable.

Obviously this may or may not be true or may or ma not apply to GDS.

Powerful families being protected is an enormous problem when SA concerns are raised. But the solution to that is to refer all cases to impartial outside authorities, and to let them provide the direction. It's not clear to me if GDS referred this to MPD, or if the parent contacted MPD before telling GDS (which would have been an excellent thing for them to do), but having MPD take the lead was the right thing to do. It does appear that MPD told GDS not to reach out to the community.

According to the letter GDS sent, they reported to the MPD and CPS and also hired an independent investigator. That would be referring the case to impartial outside authorities, yes? GDS also, in their follow-up email, said they hired an outside security consultant, and that they increased the number of cameras at the school and keep the recordings longer.

My point is that whether GDS reported to MPD and CPS, or MPD was already involved when GDS learned of the situation, GDS did the right thing by allowing MPD to direct the investigation. I can't speak to whether MPD did a good job on the investigation because obviously I don't know. But blaming GDS for making sure that MPD was involved, and following their lead is ridiculous.

I have read in one place that GDS was the one who involved MPD, and in another place that MPD was notified in January and the school was notified in February which would imply that someone other than GDS made the first call to MPD. That's why I wrote it in a vague way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
If the older boys thought about masking, then they probably did not leave other forms of evidence. And since the assault was months ago, what evidence could there be?

At this point, Met Police needs to clarify whether the allegations are credible or not, separate from whether they found evidence. If the allegations are credible, then the Head, who did not technically lie, must be brought to task for not taking this seriously enough. He's making it seem like the assault did not happen at all.

There are roughly 80 boys in 7th and 8th grade combined. Even if faces were covered, it seems that hair color, race, articles of clothing, make of sneakers, etc. are things that could have been noted. If so, it would significantly narrow the pool of suspects.

I have deep compassion for the victim and family. At the same time, I also understand how the school could not take action with out more proof. Would you want you your child to be expelled based on an allegation? The movie Atonement comes to mind. It seems the parents are trying to rectify this. As a parent, I would want to do everything to protect my child. This kind of incident also makes you wonder if someone else had abused the kid (trusted adult) and this was a way to process it without implicating a real perpetrator.

I suggested this exact thing upthread. We have no way of knowing. Someone betrayed this kid but we have no way of knowing who it was.

By not seeking information about the incident from the school community, and doing a sham investigation for only their own legal protection, perhaps the HOS betrayed this kid more than anyone else.

What evidence do you have that it was a sham investigation?

What evidence do you have that it was a legitimate investigation? It appears that nothing was done. Not even a basic request for info. Was anybody interviewed besides the victim?

+1 MPD just filed some paperwork, the CPD just made sure the kid was safe at home, and the independent investigation was just meant for the school to legally cover themselves.

What actual investigation occurred? Nothing was done. At all.

[Anonymous]

why can't they ask the 20-40 boys in the class hey did you hear anything? do you know anything? there are not that many of them. and what are the rules for hallways? at our school you need a pass.

[Anonymous]

Our DS attended an all boys boarding school for boys in 7th - 12th grade.

A 10th grade boy created a club that required lower grades to perform fellatio on the upperclassmen in order to join the school.

We found out about this because our son tried to protect a lower grade boy from the assault and a fight broke out.

Our son was never sexually assaulted. We pulled our son from the school, sued the school, and won.

My advice - fight like hell to root out whoever did this to the poor boy to stop it from happening to someone else.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
If the older boys thought about masking, then they probably did not leave other forms of evidence. And since the assault was months ago, what evidence could there be?

At this point, Met Police needs to clarify whether the allegations are credible or not, separate from whether they found evidence. If the allegations are credible, then the Head, who did not technically lie, must be brought to task for not taking this seriously enough. He's making it seem like the assault did not happen at all.

There are roughly 80 boys in 7th and 8th grade combined. Even if faces were covered, it seems that hair color, race, articles of clothing, make of sneakers, etc. are things that could have been noted. If so, it would significantly narrow the pool of suspects.

I have deep compassion for the victim and family. At the same time, I also understand how the school could not take action with out more proof. Would you want you your child to be expelled based on an allegation? The movie Atonement comes to mind. It seems the parents are trying to rectify this. As a parent, I would want to do everything to protect my child. This kind of incident also makes you wonder if someone else had abused the kid (trusted adult) and this was a way to process it without implicating a real perpetrator.

I suggested this exact thing upthread. We have no way of knowing. Someone betrayed this kid but we have no way of knowing who it was.

By not seeking information about the incident from the school community, and doing a sham investigation for only their own legal protection, perhaps the HOS betrayed this kid more than anyone else.

What evidence do you have that it was a sham investigation?

What evidence do you have that it was a legitimate investigation? It appears that nothing was done. Not even a basic request for info. Was anybody interviewed besides the victim?

+1 MPD just filed some paperwork, the CPD just made sure the kid was safe at home, and the independent investigation was just meant for the school to legally cover themselves.

What actual investigation occurred? Nothing was done. At all.

A few questions.

1) Who is CPD? Do you mean CPS? If so, CPS does not investigate same age SA, that is for MPD to investigate. CPS's entire responsibility it to address abuse or neglect by parents or caregivers, with the latter including school staff. Their role here would be to determine whether there was an issue of the school failure to protect, or of the parents somehow being involved (e.g. parents are encouraging kid to make false allegations, or parents are the actual abuser and kid is deflecting).

2) How do you know what MPD, and the independent investigators did or didn't do?

3) If it's true that MPD and the independent investigators (the people who were ethically required to investigate) didn't investigate, then why are you blaming the school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
If the older boys thought about masking, then they probably did not leave other forms of evidence. And since the assault was months ago, what evidence could there be?

At this point, Met Police needs to clarify whether the allegations are credible or not, separate from whether they found evidence. If the allegations are credible, then the Head, who did not technically lie, must be brought to task for not taking this seriously enough. He's making it seem like the assault did not happen at all.

There are roughly 80 boys in 7th and 8th grade combined. Even if faces were covered, it seems that hair color, race, articles of clothing, make of sneakers, etc. are things that could have been noted. If so, it would significantly narrow the pool of suspects.

I have deep compassion for the victim and family. At the same time, I also understand how the school could not take action with out more proof. Would you want you your child to be expelled based on an allegation? The movie Atonement comes to mind. It seems the parents are trying to rectify this. As a parent, I would want to do everything to protect my child. This kind of incident also makes you wonder if someone else had abused the kid (trusted adult) and this was a way to process it without implicating a real perpetrator.

I suggested this exact thing upthread. We have no way of knowing. Someone betrayed this kid but we have no way of knowing who it was.

By not seeking information about the incident from the school community, and doing a sham investigation for only their own legal protection, perhaps the HOS betrayed this kid more than anyone else.

What evidence do you have that it was a sham investigation?

What evidence do you have that it was a legitimate investigation? It appears that nothing was done. Not even a basic request for info. Was anybody interviewed besides the victim?

+1 MPD just filed some paperwork, the CPD just made sure the kid was safe at home, and the independent investigation was just meant for the school to legally cover themselves.

What actual investigation occurred? Nothing was done. At all.

Then blame the police department and CPS, they are the ones responsible for investigating crimes and child neglect/abuse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
If the older boys thought about masking, then they probably did not leave other forms of evidence. And since the assault was months ago, what evidence could there be?

At this point, Met Police needs to clarify whether the allegations are credible or not, separate from whether they found evidence. If the allegations are credible, then the Head, who did not technically lie, must be brought to task for not taking this seriously enough. He's making it seem like the assault did not happen at all.

There are roughly 80 boys in 7th and 8th grade combined. Even if faces were covered, it seems that hair color, race, articles of clothing, make of sneakers, etc. are things that could have been noted. If so, it would significantly narrow the pool of suspects.

I have deep compassion for the victim and family. At the same time, I also understand how the school could not take action with out more proof. Would you want you your child to be expelled based on an allegation? The movie Atonement comes to mind. It seems the parents are trying to rectify this. As a parent, I would want to do everything to protect my child. This kind of incident also makes you wonder if someone else had abused the kid (trusted adult) and this was a way to process it without implicating a real perpetrator.

I suggested this exact thing upthread. We have no way of knowing. Someone betrayed this kid but we have no way of knowing who it was.

By not seeking information about the incident from the school community, and doing a sham investigation for only their own legal protection, perhaps the HOS betrayed this kid more than anyone else.

What evidence do you have that it was a sham investigation?

What evidence do you have that it was a legitimate investigation? It appears that nothing was done. Not even a basic request for info. Was anybody interviewed besides the victim?

DP.

Because police were involved.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
If the older boys thought about masking, then they probably did not leave other forms of evidence. And since the assault was months ago, what evidence could there be?

At this point, Met Police needs to clarify whether the allegations are credible or not, separate from whether they found evidence. If the allegations are credible, then the Head, who did not technically lie, must be brought to task for not taking this seriously enough. He's making it seem like the assault did not happen at all.

There are roughly 80 boys in 7th and 8th grade combined. Even if faces were covered, it seems that hair color, race, articles of clothing, make of sneakers, etc. are things that could have been noted. If so, it would significantly narrow the pool of suspects.

I have deep compassion for the victim and family. At the same time, I also understand how the school could not take action with out more proof. Would you want you your child to be expelled based on an allegation? The movie Atonement comes to mind. It seems the parents are trying to rectify this. As a parent, I would want to do everything to protect my child. This kind of incident also makes you wonder if someone else had abused the kid (trusted adult) and this was a way to process it without implicating a real perpetrator.

I suggested this exact thing upthread. We have no way of knowing. Someone betrayed this kid but we have no way of knowing who it was.

It doesn't sound like MPD did anything, the school of course took a back seat. It sounds like MPD just waited and let things come to them because they probably didn't prioritize it.  The MPD mindset is likely, they see 10x worse crimes and don't have the resources and time to go full on every case. I did not hear of anyone being interrogated or the use of police powers ever being used for subpoenas.  It doesn't sound like the POS school even tried to generate a list of students or students with behavior problems and actively work along with MPD to find the criminals that did their deeds under their watch. The pressure should be put on MPD and GDS. With just the parents pushing for justice with no one else putting pressure on MPD along with no one knowing about the situation because GDS was trying to sweep things under the rug no wonder the parents have been having a hell of time. Usually schools want to get to the bottom of this. But it sounds like POS GDS was putting more effort on suppression and spinning fake news than putting pressure on MPD or being proactive with MPD. Why because they were hoping it would go away and not damage them.  What a POS GDS is, unforgivable. Russell there is a special place in hell for you.

They see things ten times worse than child grape? Maybe there just weren't any leads to pursue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
If the older boys thought about masking, then they probably did not leave other forms of evidence. And since the assault was months ago, what evidence could there be?

At this point, Met Police needs to clarify whether the allegations are credible or not, separate from whether they found evidence. If the allegations are credible, then the Head, who did not technically lie, must be brought to task for not taking this seriously enough. He's making it seem like the assault did not happen at all.

There are roughly 80 boys in 7th and 8th grade combined. Even if faces were covered, it seems that hair color, race, articles of clothing, make of sneakers, etc. are things that could have been noted. If so, it would significantly narrow the pool of suspects.

I have deep compassion for the victim and family. At the same time, I also understand how the school could not take action with out more proof. Would you want you your child to be expelled based on an allegation? The movie Atonement comes to mind. It seems the parents are trying to rectify this. As a parent, I would want to do everything to protect my child. This kind of incident also makes you wonder if someone else had abused the kid (trusted adult) and this was a way to process it without implicating a real perpetrator.

I suggested this exact thing upthread. We have no way of knowing. Someone betrayed this kid but we have no way of knowing who it was.

By not seeking information about the incident from the school community, and doing a sham investigation for only their own legal protection, perhaps the HOS betrayed this kid more than anyone else.

What evidence do you have that it was a sham investigation?

What evidence do you have that it was a legitimate investigation? It appears that nothing was done. Not even a basic request for info. Was anybody interviewed besides the victim?

DP.

Because police were involved.

You really think the MPD has resources to investigate beyond the bare minimum, take a statement, and file paperwork? If there are no obvious leads, they move onto the next case. This isn’t some TV show.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do people think that MPD, CPS, and a highly regarded third party investigator are all lying about the lack of evidence?
Again GDS has no incentive to prevent a thorough investigation. Think about it. GDS would be doomed if after all of this the perpetrator(s) committed another assault. GDS has every incentive to find these alleged criminals and get them out of the school. The school would be sued out of existence if they failed to find the perpetrators.

This, exactly. The number of people who are on this board claiming that the school didn't allow a thorough investigation is mind-boggling. If the school or MPD knew who the perpetrators were and failed to take action, there would be hell to pay if the perpetrators ever did anything even remotely abusive again.

And the person upthread who claims Russell will be rotting in hell clearly has a personal, pathological vendetta against him. The word unhinged gets thrown around this board a lot, but that person clearly has a loose screw.

As for the person who claimed they contacted all the admissions departments at the top colleges to alert them (12:12 pm 2/14): I'm pretty sure that is just a troll. No one could be that idiotic. They claim they learned about the incident in the spring of 2025 and demanded to speak to Russell about it. Why anyone would believe that HOS owed them a discussion about a confidential investigation shows a lack of basic judgment or, indeed, any basic understanding of either the law or how any school works. Newsflash: you don't get access to internal information just because you want it. Plus, if you knew so long ago, why did you think it was your job to alert colleges, and not other parents? Thus I can only conclude that you are a troll.

They tried to speak to Russell about the security issues at the school as well as his son being bullied. When Russell dodged him he said he would withdraw his child eventually and I guess he retaliated at Russell for misrepresenting the school as a safe place to get an education while in fact there was this situation, his child getting bullied, and security issues. The person can contact whomever they want, they don't have an obligation to alert other parents, that's GDS job. He probably didn't want to deal with parents because they would do what you are doing, calling them a troll.

It really sounds like you're another paid employee of GDS. For the other person you too are name calling unhinged. Russell tried to hide the problem and only when his hand was forced did he say something. So you have no problem with the fact that Russell tried to deceive you? If the parents never spoke up you never would have know about it to sit here and write your nonsense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
If the older boys thought about masking, then they probably did not leave other forms of evidence. And since the assault was months ago, what evidence could there be?

At this point, Met Police needs to clarify whether the allegations are credible or not, separate from whether they found evidence. If the allegations are credible, then the Head, who did not technically lie, must be brought to task for not taking this seriously enough. He's making it seem like the assault did not happen at all.

There are roughly 80 boys in 7th and 8th grade combined. Even if faces were covered, it seems that hair color, race, articles of clothing, make of sneakers, etc. are things that could have been noted. If so, it would significantly narrow the pool of suspects.

I have deep compassion for the victim and family. At the same time, I also understand how the school could not take action with out more proof. Would you want you your child to be expelled based on an allegation? The movie Atonement comes to mind. It seems the parents are trying to rectify this. As a parent, I would want to do everything to protect my child. This kind of incident also makes you wonder if someone else had abused the kid (trusted adult) and this was a way to process it without implicating a real perpetrator.

I suggested this exact thing upthread. We have no way of knowing. Someone betrayed this kid but we have no way of knowing who it was.

By not seeking information about the incident from the school community, and doing a sham investigation for only their own legal protection, perhaps the HOS betrayed this kid more than anyone else.

What evidence do you have that it was a sham investigation?

What evidence do you have that it was a legitimate investigation? It appears that nothing was done. Not even a basic request for info. Was anybody interviewed besides the victim?

DP.

Because police were involved.

You really think the MPD has resources to investigate beyond the bare minimum, take a statement, and file paperwork? If there are no obvious leads, they move onto the next case. This isn’t some TV show.

That's exactly right. Complicated cases takes people to pressure and demand more effort

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am not a parent at GDS, but at a similar private school. What I have heard is that powerful families are protected at these schools. Fortunately, my kids have never been involved in bad situations, but others that have say that this kid or that kid are untouchable.

Obviously this may or may not be true or may or ma not apply to GDS.

There is a limit to this and it does not extend to criminal investigations by the police.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
If the older boys thought about masking, then they probably did not leave other forms of evidence. And since the assault was months ago, what evidence could there be?

At this point, Met Police needs to clarify whether the allegations are credible or not, separate from whether they found evidence. If the allegations are credible, then the Head, who did not technically lie, must be brought to task for not taking this seriously enough. He's making it seem like the assault did not happen at all.

There are roughly 80 boys in 7th and 8th grade combined. Even if faces were covered, it seems that hair color, race, articles of clothing, make of sneakers, etc. are things that could have been noted. If so, it would significantly narrow the pool of suspects.

I have deep compassion for the victim and family. At the same time, I also understand how the school could not take action with out more proof. Would you want you your child to be expelled based on an allegation? The movie Atonement comes to mind. It seems the parents are trying to rectify this. As a parent, I would want to do everything to protect my child. This kind of incident also makes you wonder if someone else had abused the kid (trusted adult) and this was a way to process it without implicating a real perpetrator.

I suggested this exact thing upthread. We have no way of knowing. Someone betrayed this kid but we have no way of knowing who it was.

By not seeking information about the incident from the school community, and doing a sham investigation for only their own legal protection, perhaps the HOS betrayed this kid more than anyone else.

What evidence do you have that it was a sham investigation?

What evidence do you have that it was a legitimate investigation? It appears that nothing was done. Not even a basic request for info. Was anybody interviewed besides the victim?

+1 MPD just filed some paperwork, the CPD just made sure the kid was safe at home, and the independent investigation was just meant for the school to legally cover themselves.

What actual investigation occurred? Nothing was done. At all.

A few questions.

1) Who is CPD? Do you mean CPS? If so, CPS does not investigate same age SA, that is for MPD to investigate. CPS's entire responsibility it to address abuse or neglect by parents or caregivers, with the latter including school staff. Their role here would be to determine whether there was an issue of the school failure to protect, or of the parents somehow being involved (e.g. parents are encouraging kid to make false allegations, or parents are the actual abuser and kid is deflecting).

2) How do you know what MPD, and the independent investigators did or didn't do?

3) If it's true that MPD and the independent investigators (the people who were ethically required to investigate) didn't investigate, then why are you blaming the school?

Agree, the CPS was not going to be helpful here. If MDP has no clear leads, they move on. Their resources are limited. The independent investigator works for the school, for the benefit of the school. They are just legal protection.

What I do blame is the school for not allowing the parents to ask the school community for information to help the case. This could have been done a long time ago. Curious why they would have blocked this?