LCPS sexual assualt - who is held accountable?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The attempts to downplay and cover up this event - - from the principal, the school board, parents who tried to get Mr. Smith to shut up at the meeting, the media, even the moderator of this very website - - is astounding.

+ a million

+ a trillion

The fact the the Commonwealth attorney pursued charges against the father is what I find the most astounding. She has prosecutorial discretion, she knew exactly what she was doing, and she was using her position to silence this father. It was a political hit job where she abused her most powerful position. When this story first broke, I thought there is no fathomable way this is true - not the transgender distraction, the targeted prosecution of the dad. We are at an inflection point - do we want to live in a country where fathers of sexual assault victims are prosecuted for speaking out, but the criminal who steals the purse from the elderly woman's car as she goes for a walk in the park (and charges $3000 in purchases before her walk is complete) never even has a case opened against him? Bari Weiss sure thinks we have gone mad, and I am starting to agree.

Agree 100%

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So based on the evidence it sounds like the school board and superintendent should be held responsible for relocating this student. But trying to make it a transgender issue sounds like an attempt to influence the upcoming governor election.

The point is because the kid wore skirts, the administration perceived him as potentially transgender, which seems to be why they lied.

No

I'm sorry, can we at least admit if it was a teenager not wearing a skirt (and especially if he were Black) this would have been handled very differently top to bottom.

Or, imagine if the boy wearing a skirt was taped in the bathroom. It would be all over the media and even more protests. Parents and teachers would demand justice, and rightfully so.

[Anonymous]

Was the boy even transgender? I knew guys in high school that wore skirts and transgender wasn't really that mainstream. They were all goths.

That said, I can't believe these details. What kind of f$ckery did they think they were getting away with?

I also agree that if the storyline was switched Mr. Smith would have every media outlet talking to him vs being arrested. But what is new. Women are always not believed when they report rapes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
I'm sorry, can we at least admit if it was a teenager not wearing a skirt (and especially if he were Black) this would have been handled very differently top to bottom.

. No we cannot. A black man sexually assaulted me as a child and three other females. I testified against him in court and he got off scott free except he was transferred at work. He never wore a skirt and played football. This was in Fort Belvoir, VA in the 90s. This teen in a knee-length skirt actually got a sentence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So based on the evidence it sounds like the school board and superintendent should be held responsible for relocating this student. But trying to make it a transgender issue sounds like an attempt to influence the upcoming governor election.

Correct.

And the victim met the boy in the bathroom for consensual sex on previous occasions so it wasn’t about the skirt or transgender issue at all.

Correct.

Incorrect.

[Anonymous]

The girl was raped by a boy in a bathroom where she had previously had consensual sex with him.

[Anonymous]

This wasn’t about a transgender girl at all. It was about a boy who snuck into an available, unsupervised space to have sex with a consensual partner, repeatedly. And the last time he met her in this unsupervised space, he raped her.

It had nothing to do with this spectre the right wants to conjure, of a girl being pounced upon by a skirt-wearing man while she is changing a tampon. It was, essentially, date rape…no less rape, but very different than the idea of a predatory man lurking in wait in an unsuspecting girl who thought he was a girl.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This wasn’t about a transgender girl at all. It was about a boy who snuck into an available, unsupervised space to have sex with a consensual partner, repeatedly. And the last time he met her in this unsupervised space, he raped her.

It had nothing to do with this spectre the right wants to conjure, of a girl being pounced upon by a skirt-wearing man while she is changing a tampon. It was, essentially, date rape…no less rape, but very different than the idea of a predatory man lurking in wait in an unsuspecting girl who thought he was a girl.

Please. I agree the rape had nothing to do with his skirt (although he said otherwise.) However, pretty sure that wearing a skirt gave him cover to waltz into the girls' bathroom.

This was the point. It's not the true transgenders that people are afraid of--it is the abuse of the policy since there is no requirement for some type of formal policy of who is and who is not allowed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This wasn’t about a transgender girl at all. It was about a boy who snuck into an available, unsupervised space to have sex with a consensual partner, repeatedly. And the last time he met her in this unsupervised space, he raped her.

It had nothing to do with this spectre the right wants to conjure, of a girl being pounced upon by a skirt-wearing man while she is changing a tampon. It was, essentially, date rape…no less rape, but very different than the idea of a predatory man lurking in wait in an unsuspecting girl who thought he was a girl.

The rapist boy was gender fluid and wore a skirt.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This wasn’t about a transgender girl at all. It was about a boy who snuck into an available, unsupervised space to have sex with a consensual partner, repeatedly. And the last time he met her in this unsupervised space, he raped her.

It had nothing to do with this spectre the right wants to conjure, of a girl being pounced upon by a skirt-wearing man while she is changing a tampon. It was, essentially, date rape…no less rape, but very different than the idea of a predatory man lurking in wait in an unsuspecting girl who thought he was a girl.

Please. I agree the rape had nothing to do with his skirt (although he said otherwise.) However, pretty sure that wearing a skirt gave him cover to waltz into the girls' bathroom.

This was the point. It's not the true transgenders that people are afraid of--it is the abuse of the policy since there is no requirement for some type of formal policy of who is and who is not allowed.

If this guy was a true predator, and sounds like he was, then wouldn't he have entered the bathroom and raped someone regardless of the fact that he was wearing a skirt?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This wasn’t about a transgender girl at all. It was about a boy who snuck into an available, unsupervised space to have sex with a consensual partner, repeatedly. And the last time he met her in this unsupervised space, he raped her.

It had nothing to do with this spectre the right wants to conjure, of a girl being pounced upon by a skirt-wearing man while she is changing a tampon. It was, essentially, date rape…no less rape, but very different than the idea of a predatory man lurking in wait in an unsuspecting girl who thought he was a girl.

Please. I agree the rape had nothing to do with his skirt (although he said otherwise.) However, pretty sure that wearing a skirt gave him cover to waltz into the girls' bathroom.

This was the point. It's not the true transgenders that people are afraid of--it is the abuse of the policy since there is no requirement for some type of formal policy of who is and who is not allowed.

If this guy was a true predator, and sounds like he was, then wouldn't he have entered the bathroom and raped someone regardless of the fact that he was wearing a skirt?

It wouldn’t have been as easy. No one wants to tell a boy in a skirt to get out of the ladies room bc of where we are in this world today.

[Anonymous]

He had consensual sex with this girl in that bathroom before. He wasn’t in there because people thought he was a girl.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The attempts to downplay and cover up this event - - from the principal, the school board, parents who tried to get Mr. Smith to shut up at the meeting, the media, even the moderator of this very website - - is astounding.

Or, look at it from this point...

The SB tried to silence Mr. Smith because they had received NO record of any assaults taking place. Why? Because the school had yet to investigate. Why? Because the school investigation can only take place AFTER the police investigation. Why? So as not to taint any evidence or cause any issues for the police & prosecutors in the case.

To the SB, a man shouting about his DD being raped by a boy in a skirt looks like just another angry anti-trans parent. And that's exactly the narrative that was taken and portrayed in the news. Had Loudoun not have had loads of anti-trans bigots bussed in for each SB meeting, maybe the outcome would have been different. Maybe when an angry parent started shouting at the meeting, the SB could have made inquiries instead of just writing him off as a nutso. But no, you had a rightfully angry parent shouting about a "boy in a skirt" among hundreds of other anti-trans and pro-trans parents (most of whom had NO kids in LCPS).

I think the laws/rules should be changed so that as soon as an accusation is made by one student against another, the SB and Superintendent are notified along with the parents who have other kids at that school. I understand why no school investigation can take place until after the police have concluded theirs, but at the very least, notification needs to happen ASAP.

When my one kid, who was back to in-person schooling in May 2020, told me what happened that day, he said that a girl had been raped a bathroom. I asked where he heard that. He said so-and-so told me. I told him not to believe teenage gossip because the notification from the principal stated that it was an incident between a parent and school staff that caused the SRO to call in additional support units. Things died down. When Mr. Smith was arrested, my son saw it on the news later and said, "that's ____ dad. You know, the girl who was raped." I still didn't believe a rape had occurred until he told me that and I watched a video on Twitter of what Mr. Smith had been saying... and at that point, school was over for LCPS. I didn't know what to do because I had teenage gossip on one had and media coverage on the other telling us that he was a right-wing nutso.

I'm upset there was a lack of transparency. Being transparent doesn't mean you give the student's names or even grades. Being transparent means you send a notification to the school community that an allegation of X, Y, Z happened on this date and appropriate action is being taken.

The latest FOIA release shows that the superintendent notified the SB the afternoon the rape allegation was made about what happened. The lies, half truths, and technicalities need to stop. It's just making everything worse. At this point, I have flipped and DO think that the superintendent and SB members need to go.

Watch the school board meeting video. Brenda Sheridan calls out a name, I think it is Jessica Smith, Ziegler walks over a note to Sheridan, and Ian Serotkin is on his phone then looking at them. They all knew about this at the school board meeting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The attempts to downplay and cover up this event - - from the principal, the school board, parents who tried to get Mr. Smith to shut up at the meeting, the media, even the moderator of this very website - - is astounding.

Or, look at it from this point...

The SB tried to silence Mr. Smith because they had received NO record of any assaults taking place. Why? Because the school had yet to investigate. Why? Because the school investigation can only take place AFTER the police investigation. Why? So as not to taint any evidence or cause any issues for the police & prosecutors in the case.

To the SB, a man shouting about his DD being raped by a boy in a skirt looks like just another angry anti-trans parent. And that's exactly the narrative that was taken and portrayed in the news. Had Loudoun not have had loads of anti-trans bigots bussed in for each SB meeting, maybe the outcome would have been different. Maybe when an angry parent started shouting at the meeting, the SB could have made inquiries instead of just writing him off as a nutso. But no, you had a rightfully angry parent shouting about a "boy in a skirt" among hundreds of other anti-trans and pro-trans parents (most of whom had NO kids in LCPS).

I think the laws/rules should be changed so that as soon as an accusation is made by one student against another, the SB and Superintendent are notified along with the parents who have other kids at that school. I understand why no school investigation can take place until after the police have concluded theirs, but at the very least, notification needs to happen ASAP.

When my one kid, who was back to in-person schooling in May 2020, told me what happened that day, he said that a girl had been raped a bathroom. I asked where he heard that. He said so-and-so told me. I told him not to believe teenage gossip because the notification from the principal stated that it was an incident between a parent and school staff that caused the SRO to call in additional support units. Things died down. When Mr. Smith was arrested, my son saw it on the news later and said, "that's ____ dad. You know, the girl who was raped." I still didn't believe a rape had occurred until he told me that and I watched a video on Twitter of what Mr. Smith had been saying... and at that point, school was over for LCPS. I didn't know what to do because I had teenage gossip on one had and media coverage on the other telling us that he was a right-wing nutso.

I'm upset there was a lack of transparency. Being transparent doesn't mean you give the student's names or even grades. Being transparent means you send a notification to the school community that an allegation of X, Y, Z happened on this date and appropriate action is being taken.

The latest FOIA release shows that the superintendent notified the SB the afternoon the rape allegation was made about what happened. The lies, half truths, and technicalities need to stop. It's just making everything worse. At this point, I have flipped and DO think that the superintendent and SB members need to go.

Wow, way to blame the victim.

I see no victim blaming here?

These are good points. If this had been a normal school board meeting before the bathroom bill and CRT hoopla, we would have heard about the rape earlier, imo. The latter two distracted from it and the school board played off that distraction to deceive.

So many adults failed these two young women in Loudoun.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The attempts to downplay and cover up this event - - from the principal, the school board, parents who tried to get Mr. Smith to shut up at the meeting, the media, even the moderator of this very website - - is astounding.

Or, look at it from this point...

The SB tried to silence Mr. Smith because they had received NO record of any assaults taking place. Why? Because the school had yet to investigate. Why? Because the school investigation can only take place AFTER the police investigation. Why? So as not to taint any evidence or cause any issues for the police & prosecutors in the case.

To the SB, a man shouting about his DD being raped by a boy in a skirt looks like just another angry anti-trans parent. And that's exactly the narrative that was taken and portrayed in the news. Had Loudoun not have had loads of anti-trans bigots bussed in for each SB meeting, maybe the outcome would have been different. Maybe when an angry parent started shouting at the meeting, the SB could have made inquiries instead of just writing him off as a nutso. But no, you had a rightfully angry parent shouting about a "boy in a skirt" among hundreds of other anti-trans and pro-trans parents (most of whom had NO kids in LCPS).

I think the laws/rules should be changed so that as soon as an accusation is made by one student against another, the SB and Superintendent are notified along with the parents who have other kids at that school. I understand why no school investigation can take place until after the police have concluded theirs, but at the very least, notification needs to happen ASAP.

When my one kid, who was back to in-person schooling in May 2020, told me what happened that day, he said that a girl had been raped a bathroom. I asked where he heard that. He said so-and-so told me. I told him not to believe teenage gossip because the notification from the principal stated that it was an incident between a parent and school staff that caused the SRO to call in additional support units. Things died down. When Mr. Smith was arrested, my son saw it on the news later and said, "that's ____ dad. You know, the girl who was raped." I still didn't believe a rape had occurred until he told me that and I watched a video on Twitter of what Mr. Smith had been saying... and at that point, school was over for LCPS. I didn't know what to do because I had teenage gossip on one had and media coverage on the other telling us that he was a right-wing nutso.

I'm upset there was a lack of transparency. Being transparent doesn't mean you give the student's names or even grades. Being transparent means you send a notification to the school community that an allegation of X, Y, Z happened on this date and appropriate action is being taken.

The latest FOIA release shows that the superintendent notified the SB the afternoon the rape allegation was made about what happened. The lies, half truths, and technicalities need to stop. It's just making everything worse. At this point, I have flipped and DO think that the superintendent and SB members need to go.

Watch the school board meeting video. Brenda Sheridan calls out a name, I think it is Jessica Smith, Ziegler walks over a note to Sheridan, and Ian Serotkin is on his phone then looking at them. They all knew about this at the school board meeting.

They all need to get out. Shame on them.