Reply to Nysmith allegedly allowed antisemetic bullying and expelled the kids who's parents complained

Forum Index » Private & Independent Schools

Reply to "Nysmith allegedly allowed antisemetic bullying and expelled the kids who's parents complained"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Well said, pp. [/quote]

Agree.

Anyone know if the school potentially has a defamation claim here? This is really spiraling in the press. 
[/quote]

Unquestionably. And it's warranted, but it won't correct the public narrative and carries substantial risks. This ain't Brandeis's first rodeo. They'd welcome an opportunity to keep the story in the news cycle and frame a countersuit as retaliation that reinforces the antisemitism narrative they are spinning.  It's an election year. AG Miyares already posturing on this case on Laura Ingraham yesterday.  Signaled an intent to escalate symbolically, if not legally, but it struck me that he was speaking as if the allegations were true, prior to any investigation or adversarial hearing. Tread carefully, Nysmith.  Miyares has close affiliations with Brandeis, with at least one alum sitting on his political baby, the Antisemitism Task Force. He's itching for a high-profile case.  If you believe in the unwavering objectivity of politicians, I applaud you for your naivete. But if Nysmith isn't careful, they'll find themselves at the hands of a political apparatus that will attempt to use this case as an election year message about combating antisemitism, the facts won't matter.

Nysmith is for-profit, elite, and secular. That makes them a soft target. Destroying them makes no enemies.  There are no constituencies to worry about alienating.  If you think there aren't political consultants telling the AG this same thing, you're kidding yourself.  Nysmith needs to operate under the assumption that the AG's office is not neutral and recognize that this case has potential to be a narrative vehicle in an election season.

I personally think the complaint is reprehensible.  Doesn’t mean it’s all fabricated, but I’m absolutely not buying what they’re selling because I know what manufactured outrage looks like and this one stinks to high heck.  You sheep can bleat all day and night. You’re being played.  But I’d caution anyone pushing the school to go on the offensive.  A countersuit against a Jewish family alleging antisemitism is narratively catastrophic. The strategy on the other side is in soliciting outrage, and the substitution effect is real.  You've already seen it in action. A public referendum rejecting antisemitism based on hearsay and a narrative fiction assigned to a deliberately misleading photograph.  There’s no fair and objective look at the complaint, and that’s very much intentional.  The facts won't be relevant. Nuance falls on deaf ears, and bad actors will continue to behave reprehensively behind righteous covers.  Nysmith ain’t gonna get a fair shake, and they need to find an offramp because the road ahead is rough. A highly partisan media with irresistable Hitler-click bait, an objective that’s politically aligned with the AG’s election, advocacy organizations with ideological missions, and very wealthy parents that are out for blood.

Perceptions, not truth, govern reputation.

But I digress.  To answer your question.  Yeah, real strong case for defamation. 
Falsity. Publication. Damages, and actual malice with a reckless disregard for the truth.  Misstatement of facts loaded value judgements resting on false factual premises.

That photograph, and the deliberate misrepresentations could eventually prove problematic for the parents. The context of that photograph was widely available to them. It's their own child's assignment. They declared "under penalty of perjury that the information provided herein is true and correct to the best of my knowledge." 
The media patterns strongly suggest that the complainants or their agents deliberately amplified the claims.
Maybe even toss in some tortious interference.
[/quote]

You really need to stop throwing around legal terms that you quite obviously do not understand at all. [/quote]

This. Top legal professionals turn away many cases. They take on cases they feel strongly they can win.

It doesn't sound like the leader of the school is a seasoned professional. From other people's reports,  he spent a lot of time working for mommy. Is there even a Board of Directors there? [/quote]

Nope, Nysmith does not have a Board or accept donations. Ken has been the Head of School for a long time now, even before his mother passed away.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics