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?

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

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?

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.

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.

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.