LCPS sexual assualt - who is held accountable?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:54 pages and two weeks later no sign of accountability.

Gotta love that equity tho!

The assault was investigated. The rapist has been arrested and charged. There's no evidence that he used LCPS bathroom policies to access the bathroom. What accountability do you think is missing?

lol? Superintendent Ziegler lying on record? Allowing a serial sex offender to perpetrate again? Idk? Thinking out loud here.

If he leaves, google his name in a year, safe bet he'll big in another district, likely making 10% more than he is now. Crook school admins are never fired and blackballed from new gigs. They get exit packages with six figure payouts, non disparagement agreement, and a sterling letter of rec from the board.

I believe Ziegler is an interim superintendent, and no buyout would be required.

False and false. They won’t fire him because this is a political football & if they wanted to get him to leave it will cost BIG BUCKS. This hack is going to get paid a lot of coin.

They won’t fire him because no other superintendent could have made different choices . Title IX dictated what school could do. So did respecting student privacy and the integrity of the LCSO investigation. Policy 8040 was a state mandate that they had to pass no matter what. There is no other choice that could have made and Ziegler isn’t ineffective because he has to do what laws say he has to do.

It's so tiring repeating facts again and again to these terrorist/traitor wanna bes. They will twist things ridiculously so they can replace the school board with equally narrow minded ignoramuses.

[Anonymous]

nyt columnist

[Anonymous]

They won’t fire him because no other superintendent could have made different choices . Title IX dictated what school could do. So did respecting student privacy and the integrity of the LCSO investigation. Policy 8040 was a state mandate that they had to pass no matter what. There is no other choice that could have made and Ziegler isn’t ineffective because he has to do what laws say he has to do.


It's so tiring repeating facts again and again to these terrorist/traitor wanna bes. They will twist things ridiculously so they can replace the school board with equally narrow minded ignoramuses.

Once more, please show me in Title IX where the superintendent is not allowed to disclose that there is an ongoing investigation of an alleged assault?

[Anonymous]

They won’t fire him because no other superintendent could have made different choices . Title IX dictated what school could do. So did respecting student privacy and the integrity of the LCSO investigation. Policy 8040 was a state mandate that they had to pass no matter what. There is no other choice that could have made and Ziegler isn’t ineffective because he has to do what laws say he has to do.

It's so tiring repeating facts again and again to these terrorist/traitor wanna bes. They will twist things ridiculously so they can replace the school board with equally narrow minded ignoramuses.

"Terrorists and traitors"? Why not go all in and call them vermin? Very WWII of you.

Nice subtle self defense. I note how you dropped the Dr. from Ziegler so we wouldn't think you posted this.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:I have removed several posts from this thread that have claimed that Attorney General Garland called parents "domestic terrorists". First, those posts are off-topic for this thread. More importantly, Garland did no such thing. As is not uncommon with zombie myths that the right-wing accepts as truth, this myth will probably never die. But, here is Garland's memo:

https://www.justice.gov/ag/page/file/1438986/download

As you will see if you bother to read it, it doesn't mention "terrorism" or "terrorists" at all. It explicitly mentions that spirited debate is protected under the Constitution, but stresses that threats of violence and efforts to intimidate are illegal.

I think this is where the "terrorist" connection was made (but not from Garland, as you noted):
https://www.nsba.org/-/media/NSBA/File/nsba-letter-to-president-biden-concerning-threats-to-public-schools-and-school-board-members-92921.pdf?la=en&hash=642B7B91E0029BA4427D0F38D7054A007537160F160F

As these acts of malice, violence, and threats against public school officials have increased, the
classification of these heinous actions could be the equivalent to a form of domestic terrorism and
hate crimes. As such, NSBA requests a joint expedited review by the U.S. Departments of Justice,
Education, and Homeland Security, along with the appropriate training, coordination,
investigations, and enforcement mechanisms from the FBI, including any technical assistance
necessary from, and state and local coordination with, its National Security Branch and
Counterterrorism Division, as well as any other federal agency with relevant jurisdictional authority
and oversight.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:I have removed several posts from this thread that have claimed that Attorney General Garland called parents "domestic terrorists". First, those posts are off-topic for this thread. More importantly, Garland did no such thing. As is not uncommon with zombie myths that the right-wing accepts as truth, this myth will probably never die. But, here is Garland's memo:

https://www.justice.gov/ag/page/file/1438986/download

As you will see if you bother to read it, it doesn't mention "terrorism" or "terrorists" at all. It explicitly mentions that spirited debate is protected under the Constitution, but stresses that threats of violence and efforts to intimidate are illegal.

I think this is where the "terrorist" connection was made (but not from Garland, as you noted):
https://www.nsba.org/-/media/NSBA/File/nsba-letter-to-president-biden-concerning-threats-to-public-schools-and-school-board-members-92921.pdf?la=en&hash=642B7B91E0029BA4427D0F38D7054A007537160F160F

As these acts of malice, violence, and threats against public school officials have increased, the
classification of these heinous actions could be the equivalent to a form of domestic terrorism and
hate crimes. As such, NSBA requests a joint expedited review by the U.S. Departments of Justice,
Education, and Homeland Security, along with the appropriate training, coordination,
investigations, and enforcement mechanisms from the FBI, including any technical assistance
necessary from, and state and local coordination with, its National Security Branch and
Counterterrorism Division, as well as any other federal agency with relevant jurisdictional authority
and oversight.

And, Garland attributed his rationale for writing the memo to this letter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:54 pages and two weeks later no sign of accountability.

Gotta love that equity tho!

The assault was investigated. The rapist has been arrested and charged. There's no evidence that he used LCPS bathroom policies to access the bathroom. What accountability do you think is missing?

lol? Superintendent Ziegler lying on record? Allowing a serial sex offender to perpetrate again? Idk? Thinking out loud here.

If he leaves, google his name in a year, safe bet he'll big in another district, likely making 10% more than he is now. Crook school admins are never fired and blackballed from new gigs. They get exit packages with six figure payouts, non disparagement agreement, and a sterling letter of rec from the board.

I believe Ziegler is an interim superintendent, and no buyout would be required.

False and false. They won’t fire him because this is a political football & if they wanted to get him to leave it will cost BIG BUCKS. This hack is going to get paid a lot of coin.

They won’t fire him because no other superintendent could have made different choices . Title IX dictated what school could do. So did respecting student privacy and the integrity of the LCSO investigation. Policy 8040 was a state mandate that they had to pass no matter what. There is no other choice that could have made and Ziegler isn’t ineffective because he has to do what laws say he has to do.

It's so tiring repeating facts again and again to these terrorist/traitor wanna bes. They will twist things ridiculously so they can replace the school board with equally narrow minded ignoramuses.

That's called cognitive dissonance. It is what causes Trump Derangement Syndrome. People who define themselves by their political party are simply unable to view facts and circumstances without a really distorted bias and filter to shoe horn everything into our out of their narrative. It is ruining the country.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

hey won’t fire him because no other superintendent could have made different choices . Title IX dictated what school could do. So did respecting student privacy and the integrity of the LCSO investigation. Policy 8040 was a state mandate that they had to pass no matter what. There is no other choice that could have made and Ziegler isn’t ineffective because he has to do what laws say he has to do.

Where in Title IX does it say that you can not acknowledge that there is an ongoing investigation of an alleged assault?

And, honestly, it was a month later. He wrote the School Board on May 28 or 29, but publicly denied any reports at the June meeting. Why?

Because it was an ongoing investigation and given the students initially met by consent as they had in the past, it had not been determined at that point in time an assault or rape had in fact taken place.

I don't recall that rule being implemented when two illegal immigrants had been accused of rape in a school bathroom a couple years ago. We heard about it the same day it happened.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:I have removed several posts from this thread that have claimed that Attorney General Garland called parents "domestic terrorists". First, those posts are off-topic for this thread. More importantly, Garland did no such thing. As is not uncommon with zombie myths that the right-wing accepts as truth, this myth will probably never die. But, here is Garland's memo:

https://www.justice.gov/ag/page/file/1438986/download

As you will see if you bother to read it, it doesn't mention "terrorism" or "terrorists" at all. It explicitly mentions that spirited debate is protected under the Constitution, but stresses that threats of violence and efforts to intimidate are illegal.

I think this is where the "terrorist" connection was made (but not from Garland, as you noted):
https://www.nsba.org/-/media/NSBA/File/nsba-letter-to-president-biden-concerning-threats-to-public-schools-and-school-board-members-92921.pdf?la=en&hash=642B7B91E0029BA4427D0F38D7054A007537160F160F

As these acts of malice, violence, and threats against public school officials have increased, the
classification of these heinous actions could be the equivalent to a form of domestic terrorism and
hate crimes. As such, NSBA requests a joint expedited review by the U.S. Departments of Justice,
Education, and Homeland Security, along with the appropriate training, coordination,
investigations, and enforcement mechanisms from the FBI, including any technical assistance
necessary from, and state and local coordination with, its National Security Branch and
Counterterrorism Division, as well as any other federal agency with relevant jurisdictional authority
and oversight.

And, Garland attributed his rationale for writing the memo to this letter.

Exactly.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
And, Garland attributed his rationale for writing the memo to this letter.

Exactly.

Since two of you apparently believe this, can you provide a citation which demonstrates Garland providing that rationale? His memo does not mention the letter.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
And, Garland attributed his rationale for writing the memo to this letter.

Exactly.

Since two of you apparently believe this, can you provide a citation which demonstrates Garland providing that rationale? His memo does not mention the letter.

Hearing in the House.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
And, Garland attributed his rationale for writing the memo to this letter.

Exactly.

Since two of you apparently believe this, can you provide a citation which demonstrates Garland providing that rationale? His memo does not mention the letter.

Hearing in the House.

Actually, no, Garland didn't say that. Republican members claimed the letter was the basis of Garland's memo, but Garland didn't say that. You are putting Republicans' words in Garland's mouth. According to a transcript that I read, Garland started to explain the relationship of the NSBA letter and his memo, but Jim Jordan repeatedly interrupted him. Since Garland was unable to complete a sentence, we will never know how much the NSBA letter influenced him. As best as I can tell, Garland tried to say that the NSBA letter motivated the DOJ to look for reports of violence and threats against school board members and it was those reports that provoked the memo. But, as I say, he wasn't able to complete his sentence thanks to Jordan.

[Anonymous]

Loudoun County Sheriff Pushes Back on Security for School Board Meetings
Loudoun County Sheriff Mike Chapman says he will no longer provide officers as security at school board meetings. News4’s Drew Wilder talks to the Sheriff on why he has chosen to push back on law enforcement presence.
https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/loudoun-county-sheriff-pushes-back-on-security-for-school-board-meetings/2858622/

I heard that during evening news but could not find any print media report it.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
And, Garland attributed his rationale for writing the memo to this letter.

Exactly.

Since two of you apparently believe this, can you provide a citation which demonstrates Garland providing that rationale? His memo does not mention the letter.

Jeff wading in way above your pay grade. These are LOCAL issues - hyper local. Generally there is no FEDERAL jurisdiction for a verbal threat. It's a state or local issue. The FEDS weighing in on this suggests that they see an area for federal jurisdiction. Maybe there are more statutes that could apply, but to my knowledge, "domestic terrorism" would be the main route for Federal jurisdiction.

I'm a die-hard Democrat, but the letter from Garland is disturbing. School boards (as evidenced by other conversations on DCUM) are the essence of local democracy, some of the places we get closest to actual direct democracy in the US. When the Feds get involved in this kind of hyper-local democracy at the same time that very political issues are being argued on that stage (CRT, gender issues, pandemic response) that absolutely, without a doubt, raises questions about chilling free speech.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
And, Garland attributed his rationale for writing the memo to this letter.

Exactly.

Since two of you apparently believe this, can you provide a citation which demonstrates Garland providing that rationale? His memo does not mention the letter.

Hearing in the House.

Actually, no, Garland didn't say that. Republican members claimed the letter was the basis of Garland's memo, but Garland didn't say that. You are putting Republicans' words in Garland's mouth. According to a transcript that I read, Garland started to explain the relationship of the NSBA letter and his memo, but Jim Jordan repeatedly interrupted him. Since Garland was unable to complete a sentence, we will never know how much the NSBA letter influenced him. As best as I can tell, Garland tried to say that the NSBA letter motivated the DOJ to look for reports of violence and threats against school board members and it was those reports that provoked the memo. But, as I say, he wasn't able to complete his sentence thanks to Jordan.

Oh come on Jeff. Any of us who have been in DC for a hot minute know that the NBSA letter influenced the Garland memo including the "creative" extension of the Patriot Act.