Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The school counselor who helped start the summit has left but is still local.

There are DC law firms that do these types of investigations.

Why was this approach and NY outfit chosen?

The investigator had expertise with schools. People are overlooking the challenge faced by the fact that the child said he could not identify his accusers. This is the part where it gets difficult for the school. No identifying information at all? And I would assume the act described might be quite difficult to execute during a five minute class break. And all kids just went on the merry way to class immediately afterwards? This may very well have happened, but unfortunately for the victim, it is not airtight and unfortunately does make it possible to cast some doubt. I understand why the family came forward to look for more corroborating evidence. In my view, the school could have proactively strengthened security measures or protocols so that if such an allegation happened in the future, there would be ways to cross check it. (For example, video surveillance of the hallway outside the bathroom that is stored for 6 months, etc.)

Anonymous wrote:I just can’t imagine their being middle schoolers doing this at GDS, but if they are, those kids will have future trouble to come.

Anonymous wrote:The HOS email seemed more likely to deter anyone with information from coming forward. T&M is a heavy handed vendor, not even local. This approach was chosen time and again by HOS and Board. Had there been changes to safety protocols that would have been emphasized in the recent communication.

The hypocrisy given the pr around the annual consent conference, started after a GDS teacher was arrested for SA on a GDS student, is notable. The school needs to be held to account to do better. The clock has been run and the school continues to try to keep the wagons circled. This is not what prioritizing the safety of a student or students as a whole looks like.

The fixer approach is so out of step with what is expected at GDS and reveals the true culture.

Anonymous wrote:“During this summit, participants will explore the complexity of sexual violence and consent. Guided by experts in the field, participants will learn how to examine current laws, policies, and programs established to support survivors, advocate for rights, and prevent sexual assault. Participants are and will continue to apply this knowledge to their own schools and communities where they can design initiatives and prompt culture change.” This is on the GDS website re: the 2025 summit.

Will any of those students try to change GDS culture or is it all just performative and the signaling to families and students will deter it? What an ugly lesson to the entire school community.

I guess if the victim is younger and male the culture is shut up and take it? Or you must be lying? Or that no safety protocols need to be changed after you were anally raped during the school day to prevent further victims?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The school counselor who helped start the summit has left but is still local.

There are DC law firms that do these types of investigations.

Why was this approach and NY outfit chosen?

The investigator had expertise with schools. People are overlooking the challenge faced by the fact that the child said he could not identify his accusers. This is the part where it gets difficult for the school. No identifying information at all? And I would assume the act described might be quite difficult to execute during a five minute class break. And all kids just went on the merry way to class immediately afterwards? This may very well have happened, but unfortunately for the victim, it is not airtight and unfortunately does make it possible to cast some doubt. I understand why the family came forward to look for more corroborating evidence. In my view, the school could have proactively strengthened security measures or protocols so that if such an allegation happened in the future, there would be ways to cross check it. (For example, video surveillance of the hallway outside the bathroom that is stored for 6 months, etc.)

Anonymous wrote:The school counselor who helped start the summit has left but is still local.

There are DC law firms that do these types of investigations.

Why was this approach and NY outfit chosen?

Anonymous wrote:We can assume that the family thought the school would investigate in good faith and eventually concluded the opposite, leading to the email. ./

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:GDS hosts an Annual Summit on Sexual Assault. I would think this means they have robust protocols for reporting and investigating? It’s not clear to me what’s in place and if they were followed based on the HOS response. Also, I’m sure the board has plenty of parent lawyers. I’m surprised they would hire a 3rd party investigation firm that offers “reputational risk” services. The optics aren’t good regardless of what services were provided.

They were more worried about their reputation than the kid. Moreover, they think the kid is lying.

bingo