GDS Student Newspaper posts about the horrible incident

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it about GDS if the police said no credible evidence? I am confused.

The police said the claim WAS credible but that they didn't have enough evidence to find the perpetrators. That's exactly why the family is hoping the community can help -- someone knows something.

GDS has not been at all helpful in gathering more information, and in fact is doing everything they can to keep people from sharing what they know.

1. MPD saying the initial complaint was credible enough to investigate does not mean it is still credible post-investigation. And credible for the purposes of investigating is a very low bar.
2. GDS followed best practices and what MPD instructed it to do. They hired an independent investigator and did not (per MPD directive) issue a general call to the school for information.
3. MPD and the investigator found no further evidence.
4. Your assertion that GDS should have done more or is engaged in a cover up is wholly fabricated and unsupported.

Well said. If you are truly concerned, suggest speaking to kids and parents in the relevant grades, there is context that could never be shared by the school. Most people seem comfortable with the schools response and the overall environment. Of course, they are the silent majority and you are likely hearing the vocal minority.

1. Do you know what MPD said or are you basing this on self serving statements from Russell?
2. What are the best practices? You're assertion that T&M is an "Independent" investigator is categorically false.
3. Based on what information? The email sent by a person who hired a firm with Epstein links and with an employing sending distrubing text messages to a Mom that runs a small business?
4. This assertion is based on facts not misleading statements from a school acting in bad faith.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:no? I think the police said no credible leads. it was credible enough to be investigated but after that, dont we have to believe the police?

The clearance rate for SA is very low. An agency like MPD doesn't really give a shit about stuff like this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If people had information about the event they should have reported it without the school asking for it. Imagine hearing a kid talking about raping another kid or being told information pertaining to the rape of another kid and not reporting it.

A call for information in a case after the Police have completed their investigation would be performative at best.

GDS is still trying to tacitly discourage it. It’s pretty shocking.

exactly. RUSSEL NEEDS TO BE TERMINATED.

He is leaving, no? So besides the point.

[Anonymous]

If there has god forbid been another incident like this at school in the time GDS sat on this for a year and did nothing, this will open up GDS to great liability including criminal liability.

This is why they should have notified the community in 2025 when this came to light - even to say we have investigated a troubling charge and not found anything. They refused to even do that.....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If people had information about the event they should have reported it without the school asking for it. Imagine hearing a kid talking about raping another kid or being told information pertaining to the rape of another kid and not reporting it.

A call for information in a case after the Police have completed their investigation would be performative at best.

GDS is still trying to tacitly discourage it. It’s pretty shocking.

exactly. RUSSEL NEEDS TO BE TERMINATED.

He is leaving, no? So besides the point.

dude just wants to survive to June so he can get out to his think tank job

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wait, GDS tuition is paying this company? I am in shock. https://tmusallc.com/investigation-consulting-services/
Is this true?


Who We Are:
Investigators and analysts who discreetly manage the most demanding cases. We are skilled at locating hidden assets, identifying online threats, and exposing fraud. Our staff has roots in law enforcement, investigative journalism, forensic accounting, and intelligence. All are thorough and results-driven.

What We Do:
Customize investigations to meet the needs of our clients: individuals to multinationals, solo practitioners to corporate law firms, startups to leaders in finance, philanthropy, entertainment, tech, higher education, public health, and art.

Forensic accounting to assist individuals, government agencies, and business entities and corporations uncover financial irregularities and ensure overall compliance.

Deliver timely, reliable, and admissible intelligence.

Vet job candidates and avoid hiring mistakes by providing context and background.

Pair our rigorous desktop research with human source intelligence and analysis to help clients mitgate risk and make better business decisions.

Locate and interview witnesses and conduct background checks for deposition preparation.

Offer a range of strategic and crisis consulting services that assess the safety of travel destinations and neutralize adverse media coverage.

Monitor social media and the dark web for reputational and physical threats and create online content to lessen the impact of negative posts.

The person hired was a woman. She "has conducted and managed hundreds of high-stakes and sensitive investigations involving sexual misconduct, harassment, discrimination, domestic violence, stalking, hazing, bullying, retaliation, and other misconduct. Julie is regularly called on to consult in matters across a wide range of institutions and organizations, including K–12 schools, colleges and universities, museums, sports organizations, nonprofits, and corporations, both in the U.S. and internationally. She also develops tailored policies and protocols and provides one-on-one and group training to help clients respond to misconduct with care, compliance, and clarity."

She "began her legal career as an Assistant District Attorney in the New York County District Attorney’s Office, where she prosecuted homicide and felony cases from investigation through trial. She gained extensive experience as a member of the Sex Crimes and Domestic Violence Units and served in the Appeals Bureau, briefing and arguing cases before the Appellate Term, Appellate Division, and the New York Court of Appeals. "

GDS hired an independent investigator who seems to be qualified. MPD did a separate investigation. As others noted, two month after the fact, it is quite difficult to get any evidence two months after the fact. In the school's communication, they said there had been no other bathroom incidents, contrary to reports here. The family is trying to acquire additional evidence. In my opinion, the school's main job, absent corroborating evidence, was to strengthen security protocols to ensure a similar incident could not happen again. Beyond that, the challenge remains that the victim said there was no identifying information for the perpetrators. It would be very difficult to sanction any student without hard evidence.

I think this is where it starts and stops.

Why not encourage anyone with information to reach out to MPD or investigators when hired? Why not encourage that now? Why not change safety procedures?

It seems like this is pretty much the only argument being made, that the school has an independent duty to “reach out to the school.” But per the article MPD asked them not to, and it is also well known that making blanket calls for information in this way can distort the results of an investigation. You are all really grasping at straws.

Where does anything say that?

From the school newspaper - "In the Feb. 13 email, Shaw said MPD asked school administrators to “refrain from broad communication to our community to avoid interference with their investigation.”

That might have been appropriate in the immediate aftermath when MPD thought it might find credible leads on its own. But that doesn't mean the school shouldn't have pushed back on that at any point in the year+ that followed. At some point, a community-wide email really should have gone out.

And what would that email have said? There was a report of a sexual assault, it was investigated by the police who could no find enough evidence to press charges or identify a suspect. The police asked us not to contact you until after they completed their investigation. Here is what we have done to try and prevent this from happening again.

If they say when it happened, people at the school would be able to figure out who the victim was because the kid was withdrawn from the school. This would violate the victims privacy.

If they say that the perpetrators were two students people will freak out wanting to know who they are and why they have not been removed. If they don't say it was other students then people freak out about people being on campus who shouldn't be, which wasn't the case.

Sending out an email only adds confusing and questions without being able to point to anything that solves the situation.

It appears the family is not worried about protecting the victims privacy, I would guess the entire school knows who he is now. That sucks for the kid because there is 0 chance that his identity doesn't get further leaked through the people who know the school and families at the school. The likelihood that new evidence is brought forward now is slim to none. Anyone who knew anything should have come forward long before this. If they didn't come forward with evidence then, what makes you think they would come forward now? Honestly, it feels like the family wants to hurt GDS in whatever way that they can and this was the best that they could do.

Are you serious? Are you paid to post or worried about college placement as a boy mom?

[Anonymous]

What I don’t understand is, wasn’t this widely known amongst middle school parents, if the victim’s parents weren’t exactly hiding it? If they wanted to inform parents, they bc ours told a few people in their circle and work would spread through the school. I’m amazed nobody seemed to know anything about it, not even rumors. Or the the victim and parents keep completely silent because they were advised by police and the school to do this during the investigation phase?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If people had information about the event they should have reported it without the school asking for it. Imagine hearing a kid talking about raping another kid or being told information pertaining to the rape of another kid and not reporting it.

A call for information in a case after the Police have completed their investigation would be performative at best.

GDS is still trying to tacitly discourage it. It’s pretty shocking.

exactly. RUSSEL NEEDS TO BE TERMINATED.

He is leaving, no? So besides the point.

the point is the board should terminate him NOW for his handling of this and not give him a bunch of standing ovations this spring as though he is the best and this didn't happen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wait, GDS tuition is paying this company? I am in shock. https://tmusallc.com/investigation-consulting-services/
Is this true?


Who We Are:
Investigators and analysts who discreetly manage the most demanding cases. We are skilled at locating hidden assets, identifying online threats, and exposing fraud. Our staff has roots in law enforcement, investigative journalism, forensic accounting, and intelligence. All are thorough and results-driven.

What We Do:
Customize investigations to meet the needs of our clients: individuals to multinationals, solo practitioners to corporate law firms, startups to leaders in finance, philanthropy, entertainment, tech, higher education, public health, and art.

Forensic accounting to assist individuals, government agencies, and business entities and corporations uncover financial irregularities and ensure overall compliance.

Deliver timely, reliable, and admissible intelligence.

Vet job candidates and avoid hiring mistakes by providing context and background.

Pair our rigorous desktop research with human source intelligence and analysis to help clients mitgate risk and make better business decisions.

Locate and interview witnesses and conduct background checks for deposition preparation.

Offer a range of strategic and crisis consulting services that assess the safety of travel destinations and neutralize adverse media coverage.

Monitor social media and the dark web for reputational and physical threats and create online content to lessen the impact of negative posts.

The person hired was a woman. She "has conducted and managed hundreds of high-stakes and sensitive investigations involving sexual misconduct, harassment, discrimination, domestic violence, stalking, hazing, bullying, retaliation, and other misconduct. Julie is regularly called on to consult in matters across a wide range of institutions and organizations, including K–12 schools, colleges and universities, museums, sports organizations, nonprofits, and corporations, both in the U.S. and internationally. She also develops tailored policies and protocols and provides one-on-one and group training to help clients respond to misconduct with care, compliance, and clarity."

She "began her legal career as an Assistant District Attorney in the New York County District Attorney’s Office, where she prosecuted homicide and felony cases from investigation through trial. She gained extensive experience as a member of the Sex Crimes and Domestic Violence Units and served in the Appeals Bureau, briefing and arguing cases before the Appellate Term, Appellate Division, and the New York Court of Appeals. "

GDS hired an independent investigator who seems to be qualified. MPD did a separate investigation. As others noted, two month after the fact, it is quite difficult to get any evidence two months after the fact. In the school's communication, they said there had been no other bathroom incidents, contrary to reports here. The family is trying to acquire additional evidence. In my opinion, the school's main job, absent corroborating evidence, was to strengthen security protocols to ensure a similar incident could not happen again. Beyond that, the challenge remains that the victim said there was no identifying information for the perpetrators. It would be very difficult to sanction any student without hard evidence.

I think this is where it starts and stops.

Why not encourage anyone with information to reach out to MPD or investigators when hired? Why not encourage that now? Why not change safety procedures?

It seems like this is pretty much the only argument being made, that the school has an independent duty to “reach out to the school.” But per the article MPD asked them not to, and it is also well known that making blanket calls for information in this way can distort the results of an investigation. You are all really grasping at straws.

Where does anything say that?

From the school newspaper - "In the Feb. 13 email, Shaw said MPD asked school administrators to “refrain from broad communication to our community to avoid interference with their investigation.”

That might have been appropriate in the immediate aftermath when MPD thought it might find credible leads on its own. But that doesn't mean the school shouldn't have pushed back on that at any point in the year+ that followed. At some point, a community-wide email really should have gone out.

And what would that email have said? There was a report of a sexual assault, it was investigated by the police who could no find enough evidence to press charges or identify a suspect. The police asked us not to contact you until after they completed their investigation. Here is what we have done to try and prevent this from happening again.

If they say when it happened, people at the school would be able to figure out who the victim was because the kid was withdrawn from the school. This would violate the victims privacy.

If they say that the perpetrators were two students people will freak out wanting to know who they are and why they have not been removed. If they don't say it was other students then people freak out about people being on campus who shouldn't be, which wasn't the case.

Sending out an email only adds confusing and questions without being able to point to anything that solves the situation.

It appears the family is not worried about protecting the victims privacy, I would guess the entire school knows who he is now. That sucks for the kid because there is 0 chance that his identity doesn't get further leaked through the people who know the school and families at the school. The likelihood that new evidence is brought forward now is slim to none. Anyone who knew anything should have come forward long before this. If they didn't come forward with evidence then, what makes you think they would come forward now? Honestly, it feels like the family wants to hurt GDS in whatever way that they can and this was the best that they could do.

Are you serious? Are you paid to post or worried about college placement as a boy mom?

I have to wonder whether some of these posters (if they're legit, not being paid by T&M) wouldn't change their tune if, god forbid, they found themselves in the position of the parents of the victim . . .

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it about GDS if the police said no credible evidence? I am confused.

The police said the claim WAS credible but that they didn't have enough evidence to find the perpetrators. That's exactly why the family is hoping the community can help -- someone knows something.

GDS has not been at all helpful in gathering more information, and in fact is doing everything they can to keep people from sharing what they know.

What makes you think that a family or kid who knows something would come forward now because it went public when they didn’t come forward earlier? So now they know that they are supposed to report that they have information about a crime but they didn’t know that before it was made public?

People may have information that they did not realize the significance of or other victims may come forward, many possibilities. School is signaling that silence is preferred and it may be implied that anyone who speaks out is a liar. To do this kind of damage to their brand, with an Epstein linked vendor, suggests an interesting calculation. Good for the students for reporting it. Are they the only students who care about raped kids? What about the consent conference crew? Was that all a cv building exercise?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wait, GDS tuition is paying this company? I am in shock. https://tmusallc.com/investigation-consulting-services/
Is this true?


Who We Are:
Investigators and analysts who discreetly manage the most demanding cases. We are skilled at locating hidden assets, identifying online threats, and exposing fraud. Our staff has roots in law enforcement, investigative journalism, forensic accounting, and intelligence. All are thorough and results-driven.

What We Do:
Customize investigations to meet the needs of our clients: individuals to multinationals, solo practitioners to corporate law firms, startups to leaders in finance, philanthropy, entertainment, tech, higher education, public health, and art.

Forensic accounting to assist individuals, government agencies, and business entities and corporations uncover financial irregularities and ensure overall compliance.

Deliver timely, reliable, and admissible intelligence.

Vet job candidates and avoid hiring mistakes by providing context and background.

Pair our rigorous desktop research with human source intelligence and analysis to help clients mitgate risk and make better business decisions.

Locate and interview witnesses and conduct background checks for deposition preparation.

Offer a range of strategic and crisis consulting services that assess the safety of travel destinations and neutralize adverse media coverage.

Monitor social media and the dark web for reputational and physical threats and create online content to lessen the impact of negative posts.

The person hired was a woman. She "has conducted and managed hundreds of high-stakes and sensitive investigations involving sexual misconduct, harassment, discrimination, domestic violence, stalking, hazing, bullying, retaliation, and other misconduct. Julie is regularly called on to consult in matters across a wide range of institutions and organizations, including K–12 schools, colleges and universities, museums, sports organizations, nonprofits, and corporations, both in the U.S. and internationally. She also develops tailored policies and protocols and provides one-on-one and group training to help clients respond to misconduct with care, compliance, and clarity."

She "began her legal career as an Assistant District Attorney in the New York County District Attorney’s Office, where she prosecuted homicide and felony cases from investigation through trial. She gained extensive experience as a member of the Sex Crimes and Domestic Violence Units and served in the Appeals Bureau, briefing and arguing cases before the Appellate Term, Appellate Division, and the New York Court of Appeals. "

GDS hired an independent investigator who seems to be qualified. MPD did a separate investigation. As others noted, two month after the fact, it is quite difficult to get any evidence two months after the fact. In the school's communication, they said there had been no other bathroom incidents, contrary to reports here. The family is trying to acquire additional evidence. In my opinion, the school's main job, absent corroborating evidence, was to strengthen security protocols to ensure a similar incident could not happen again. Beyond that, the challenge remains that the victim said there was no identifying information for the perpetrators. It would be very difficult to sanction any student without hard evidence.

I think this is where it starts and stops.

Why not encourage anyone with information to reach out to MPD or investigators when hired? Why not encourage that now? Why not change safety procedures?

It seems like this is pretty much the only argument being made, that the school has an independent duty to “reach out to the school.” But per the article MPD asked them not to, and it is also well known that making blanket calls for information in this way can distort the results of an investigation. You are all really grasping at straws.

Where does anything say that?

From the school newspaper - "In the Feb. 13 email, Shaw said MPD asked school administrators to “refrain from broad communication to our community to avoid interference with their investigation.”

That might have been appropriate in the immediate aftermath when MPD thought it might find credible leads on its own. But that doesn't mean the school shouldn't have pushed back on that at any point in the year+ that followed. At some point, a community-wide email really should have gone out.

And what would that email have said? There was a report of a sexual assault, it was investigated by the police who could no find enough evidence to press charges or identify a suspect. The police asked us not to contact you until after they completed their investigation. Here is what we have done to try and prevent this from happening again.

If they say when it happened, people at the school would be able to figure out who the victim was because the kid was withdrawn from the school. This would violate the victims privacy.

If they say that the perpetrators were two students people will freak out wanting to know who they are and why they have not been removed. If they don't say it was other students then people freak out about people being on campus who shouldn't be, which wasn't the case.

Sending out an email only adds confusing and questions without being able to point to anything that solves the situation.

It appears the family is not worried about protecting the victims privacy, I would guess the entire school knows who he is now. That sucks for the kid because there is 0 chance that his identity doesn't get further leaked through the people who know the school and families at the school. The likelihood that new evidence is brought forward now is slim to none. Anyone who knew anything should have come forward long before this. If they didn't come forward with evidence then, what makes you think they would come forward now? Honestly, it feels like the family wants to hurt GDS in whatever way that they can and this was the best that they could do.

Are you serious? Are you paid to post or worried about college placement as a boy mom?

NP. So answer the PP’s question in the first line. What would the email have said? What would your draft look like?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wait, GDS tuition is paying this company? I am in shock. https://tmusallc.com/investigation-consulting-services/
Is this true?


Who We Are:
Investigators and analysts who discreetly manage the most demanding cases. We are skilled at locating hidden assets, identifying online threats, and exposing fraud. Our staff has roots in law enforcement, investigative journalism, forensic accounting, and intelligence. All are thorough and results-driven.

What We Do:
Customize investigations to meet the needs of our clients: individuals to multinationals, solo practitioners to corporate law firms, startups to leaders in finance, philanthropy, entertainment, tech, higher education, public health, and art.

Forensic accounting to assist individuals, government agencies, and business entities and corporations uncover financial irregularities and ensure overall compliance.

Deliver timely, reliable, and admissible intelligence.

Vet job candidates and avoid hiring mistakes by providing context and background.

Pair our rigorous desktop research with human source intelligence and analysis to help clients mitgate risk and make better business decisions.

Locate and interview witnesses and conduct background checks for deposition preparation.

Offer a range of strategic and crisis consulting services that assess the safety of travel destinations and neutralize adverse media coverage.

Monitor social media and the dark web for reputational and physical threats and create online content to lessen the impact of negative posts.

The person hired was a woman. She "has conducted and managed hundreds of high-stakes and sensitive investigations involving sexual misconduct, harassment, discrimination, domestic violence, stalking, hazing, bullying, retaliation, and other misconduct. Julie is regularly called on to consult in matters across a wide range of institutions and organizations, including K–12 schools, colleges and universities, museums, sports organizations, nonprofits, and corporations, both in the U.S. and internationally. She also develops tailored policies and protocols and provides one-on-one and group training to help clients respond to misconduct with care, compliance, and clarity."

She "began her legal career as an Assistant District Attorney in the New York County District Attorney’s Office, where she prosecuted homicide and felony cases from investigation through trial. She gained extensive experience as a member of the Sex Crimes and Domestic Violence Units and served in the Appeals Bureau, briefing and arguing cases before the Appellate Term, Appellate Division, and the New York Court of Appeals. "

GDS hired an independent investigator who seems to be qualified. MPD did a separate investigation. As others noted, two month after the fact, it is quite difficult to get any evidence two months after the fact. In the school's communication, they said there had been no other bathroom incidents, contrary to reports here. The family is trying to acquire additional evidence. In my opinion, the school's main job, absent corroborating evidence, was to strengthen security protocols to ensure a similar incident could not happen again. Beyond that, the challenge remains that the victim said there was no identifying information for the perpetrators. It would be very difficult to sanction any student without hard evidence.

I think this is where it starts and stops.

Why not encourage anyone with information to reach out to MPD or investigators when hired? Why not encourage that now? Why not change safety procedures?

It seems like this is pretty much the only argument being made, that the school has an independent duty to “reach out to the school.” But per the article MPD asked them not to, and it is also well known that making blanket calls for information in this way can distort the results of an investigation. You are all really grasping at straws.

Where does anything say that?

From the school newspaper - "In the Feb. 13 email, Shaw said MPD asked school administrators to “refrain from broad communication to our community to avoid interference with their investigation.”

That might have been appropriate in the immediate aftermath when MPD thought it might find credible leads on its own. But that doesn't mean the school shouldn't have pushed back on that at any point in the year+ that followed. At some point, a community-wide email really should have gone out.

And what would that email have said? There was a report of a sexual assault, it was investigated by the police who could no find enough evidence to press charges or identify a suspect. The police asked us not to contact you until after they completed their investigation. Here is what we have done to try and prevent this from happening again.

If they say when it happened, people at the school would be able to figure out who the victim was because the kid was withdrawn from the school. This would violate the victims privacy.

If they say that the perpetrators were two students people will freak out wanting to know who they are and why they have not been removed. If they don't say it was other students then people freak out about people being on campus who shouldn't be, which wasn't the case.

Sending out an email only adds confusing and questions without being able to point to anything that solves the situation.

It appears the family is not worried about protecting the victims privacy, I would guess the entire school knows who he is now. That sucks for the kid because there is 0 chance that his identity doesn't get further leaked through the people who know the school and families at the school. The likelihood that new evidence is brought forward now is slim to none. Anyone who knew anything should have come forward long before this. If they didn't come forward with evidence then, what makes you think they would come forward now? Honestly, it feels like the family wants to hurt GDS in whatever way that they can and this was the best that they could do.

Sounds like a terrible community if that's the case. Geez.

[Anonymous]

The likelihood of information being brought forward to an identified contact at MPD is of course greater than before the family was forced to send an email when there was less awareness and no contact.

What disgusting choices by a school who thinks they can opine about fixing consent culture to other schools.

Curious what the student take on all of this will be. They do tend to be idealistic and to oppose links to Epstein…

[Anonymous]

I have never seen a worse response by a HOS to an incident like this. Worst of all time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it about GDS if the police said no credible evidence? I am confused.

The police said the claim WAS credible but that they didn't have enough evidence to find the perpetrators. That's exactly why the family is hoping the community can help -- someone knows something.

GDS has not been at all helpful in gathering more information, and in fact is doing everything they can to keep people from sharing what they know.

What makes you think that a family or kid who knows something would come forward now because it went public when they didn’t come forward earlier? So now they know that they are supposed to report that they have information about a crime but they didn’t know that before it was made public?

Ummm do you think someone with information about this kind of crime would somehow not know that? What?