Anonymous wrote:I'm the poster who asked a few pages ago whether people had found this teacher to be creepy before this incident. The reason I asked, and this is not meant in any way to justify or lesson the horror of what happened, but I wonder, at his age, if he possibly was suffering from the beginnings of dementia or something similar. One of the symptoms of this can be highly inappropriate sexual conduct. It could be an explanation (not an excuse) for why an apparently popular teacher went off the deep end without any prior signs or clues.

Or maybe he didn't get caught until now, for whatever reason.....

I'm the poster who asked a few pages ago whether people had found this teacher to be creepy before this incident. The reason I asked, and this is not meant in any way to justify or lesson the horror of what happened, but I wonder, at his age, if he possibly was suffering from the beginnings of dementia or something similar. One of the symptoms of this can be highly inappropriate sexual conduct. It could be an explanation (not an excuse) for why an apparently popular teacher went off the deep end without any prior signs or clues.

My gut tells me that Sidwell chose to fire him as opposed to suspend him, because through their cooperation with authorities they may be privvy to further evidence which has not yet been disclosed to the public which somehow bolsters the accusations. Maybe porn was found in his home. Who knows, but something substantial enough to cause both authorities and the school to change their position. Does this make the teacher guilty? No. For example, maybe he had gay porn literature which is legal and the kid by happenstance saw it, but that does not mean that Peterson ever misconducted himself with the boy. Or maybe the boy was abused by Peterson. There are an endless number of scenarios that could have gone down.

The whole situation is tragic. I don't know Peterson or his accuser but a part of me wants him to be innocent because so many of his students were fond of him. You never want to believe that someone so beloved could be capable of something so heinous. Hopefully the truth will be revealed. Beyond the obvious devastating reasons if it proves to be true, the situation saddens me for other reasons which I will share... Growing up I went to Beauvoir/NCS and I loved both schools and I send my children to Beauvoir now. My next door neighbors on either side of me went to Sidwell and were very happy there. I might add that the kids of the families on either side of me were more than 15 years a part in age and i was in the middle. Recently I went to the memorial service of the mother of one of the families next door. At the service, I sat next to a man who turned out to be a teacher at sidwell of the oldest daughter of the family. When I explained how I knew the deceased, he immediately asked if i knew the other family which of course I did. He had been in touch close touch with the kids (now adults) for all of these years. He also had been to both family's homes many times when the kids were his students at Sidwell and since then. I found his ongoing relationship with his students very special and meaningful. I was touched that he was at the Memorial Service.

My point is that it saddens me that in this day of age with what happened at Beauvoir and now Sidwell, there will be speculation when a teacher develops close friendships with their students and enters their private lives, so these truly special connections may not be formed in our children's generation.

Regardless whether Peterson is guilty or not, new boundaries must be set as to what is appropriate off campus. I understand why, but it is very sad. I pray for all parties involved.

This is just awful, and my heart aches for everyone involved with this and with the Beauvoir incident. On the keeping the children safe scenario, it is very scary and a wake up call, i.e., if my child needed a tutor, and someone indicated that they had been a teacher at Sidwell for 30 years and were "retired", I can see myself hiring them, maybe checking a personal reference, but not calling the school as a 30 year employment history would be a good rec.. . .I am hoping that he was aware at this point that he was under investigation and wouldn't have been offering tutoring services . . . time to read a little Gavin De Becker

I am the one who wrote about liking due process and then others chimed in too. I could not agree more, no matter what the accusation or situation, we have a system of innocent until proven guilty. I also happen to have a kid at beauvoir and I would love to see Toth have his day in court and face the charges. So anyone saying what if it were your child, don't go there.

We have provided testimony in the Toth case. And I agree with the PP about balls being cut off. I'll supply the knife. There is no cure for pedophilia.

I still wonder where all the picture of the 3rd graders at Beauvoir from the hidden bathroom cameras of them pooping and peeing ended up. Yuck.

And just as a last word, my heart goes out to the sidwell families affected, who had this man as a teacher, who went to the camp, who have DC involved with him. It is such a difficult situation as no one knows yet what to believe.

Anonymous wrote:Your stupidity and illlogic is blazen. The Sidwell teacher and educator must moonlight as a custodial worker or stocker... as does your priest that receives your cleansing confessionals. I'm certain the sex offender in your neighborhood resides within your household.

Did you forget your medication again?

Anonymous wrote:mine was a victim (at the other school).

I wish beavoir had:

held him on the grounds
known he was living in the classroom
informed the parents about their initial suspicions
immediately alerted the police
had more supervision of their classrooms
not let teachers into the school at all hours (they changed this)
guarded/secured their files and confidential information
prevented teachers from working/living for/with current students (they changed this too)
hired better assistant teachers (why the assistant teacher never told is still beyond me)
stayed in touch with the affected classes beyond asking them for $ for the auction and annual fund
provided ongoing counseling (for more than one session)
held someone ANYONE accountable for all of this
not waited until the last day of school to find the pictures
contacted the affected families the day it happened and not have waited 5 days and more
refunded our $ for a wasted year

my list could go on...

My heart goes out to you and your family.

Anonymous wrote:I agree pp. What if the charges are false?

Or do they believe that the charges are true?

I agree pp. What if the charges are false?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I believe in due process, and that's why I think Sidwell has so far handled this about as well as a school can. Especially the school where the President's daughters go. You have to let the authorities do their work. The man is cooperating and it looks like he will have his day in court. It is a horrible situation as this teacher was beloved by many. Due process is one of the many good things about our country and our way of life. At the same time, the school has a primary duty of care for the children who go there too. They must protect them and take reasonable steps to ensure the children are protected from harm.

Police background checks only go so far. But still necessary. Placing a teacher/staff on admin leave is the right thing to do under these kinds of circumstances, and banning him from contact. Then they did fire him when notified that the authorities were pursuing a case. Now if he is found innocent, the damage is indeed irreparable. His reputation (or anyone else's) is forever tinged by such an accusation.

But it looks like he is cooperating and will have his day in court, unlike the (spineless) Toth who fled and has to look over his shoulder wherever he goes the rest of his life.

If your son came home and told you that Petey has been having sex with him for the last few years, would you still believe in due process?

And what if you or better yet, your husband was accused of molesting the little boy who lives next door. The question is, would you want due process for yourself!!

Not exactly the same scenario. Obviously, you loved this guy. So does he have a track record of befriending both male and female students by inviting them to his home? Did he invite more than one child at a time to his home? Perhaps, his wife can collaborate that nothing happened as she was in the room with them or nearby during the accuser's visits.

I don't know the man. I will never know the man. I don't have a child at Sidwell, and more than likely never will. It is exactly the same scenario. It is called making an accuasation against someone of one of the most heinous crimes. It is called being judged without knowing any evidence at this point, only accusations. If you cannot see the parallel of accusing this man of child molestation and condemning without due process, and accusing you of child molestation and all your neighbors shying away from you without any due process or your day in court, there is simply nothing else to say. You just don't get it. It appears that for you, it will always be okay to condemn others because afterall it must be the right thing, but if it happens to you or a loved one then somehow it is DIFFERENT. Well it is not. I am not defending the teacher. He has an attorney for that. If he is found guilty, I am one of those crazy people who think his balls should be cut off, etc. etc. I know it is extreme and unimaginable. However, before you do something like that, you should make damn certain the person is guilty. I am all about protecting the children. I have one. You can protect the children and still give this man his due process.

Odd that Sidwell chose to fire him instead of keeping him on in unpaid leave status. He had a 30-year long teaching career at Sidwell, yet admin apparently is condemning him before he has his day in court. Doesn't sound very Quaker-like to me.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I believe in due process, and that's why I think Sidwell has so far handled this about as well as a school can. Especially the school where the President's daughters go. You have to let the authorities do their work. The man is cooperating and it looks like he will have his day in court. It is a horrible situation as this teacher was beloved by many. Due process is one of the many good things about our country and our way of life. At the same time, the school has a primary duty of care for the children who go there too. They must protect them and take reasonable steps to ensure the children are protected from harm.

Police background checks only go so far. But still necessary. Placing a teacher/staff on admin leave is the right thing to do under these kinds of circumstances, and banning him from contact. Then they did fire him when notified that the authorities were pursuing a case. Now if he is found innocent, the damage is indeed irreparable. His reputation (or anyone else's) is forever tinged by such an accusation.

But it looks like he is cooperating and will have his day in court, unlike the (spineless) Toth who fled and has to look over his shoulder wherever he goes the rest of his life.

If your son came home and told you that Petey has been having sex with him for the last few years, would you still believe in due process?

And what if you or better yet, your husband was accused of molesting the little boy who lives next door. The question is, would you want due process for yourself!!

Not exactly the same scenario. Obviously, you loved this guy. So does he have a track record of befriending both male and female students by inviting them to his home? Did he invite more than one child at a time to his home? Perhaps, his wife can collaborate that nothing happened as she was in the room with them or nearby during the accuser's visits.

I don't know the man. I will never know the man. I don't have a child at Sidwell, and more than likely never will. It is exactly the same scenario. It is called making an accuasation against someone of one of the most heinous crimes. It is called being judged without knowing any evidence at this point, only accusations. If you cannot see the parallel of accusing this man of child molestation and condemning without due process, and accusing you of child molestation and all your neighbors shying away from you without any due process or your day in court, there is simply nothing else to say. You just don't get it. It appears that for you, it will always be okay to condemn others because afterall it must be the right thing, but if it happens to you or a loved one then somehow it is DIFFERENT. Well it is not. I am not defending the teacher. He has an attorney for that. If he is found guilty, I am one of those crazy people who think his balls should be cut off, etc. etc. I know it is extreme and unimaginable. However, before you do something like that, you should make damn certain the person is guilty. I am all about protecting the children. I have one. You can protect the children and still give this man his due process.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd like to say that, in the current situation, the accused is innocent until proven guilty.

Couple years ago a group of adolescent girls made false accusations against a PE teacher in Montgomery County(they were mad at him because he had written up one of their group for not participating) He was eventually cleared, but the damage to his reputation was irreparable.He was placed on administrative leave , but did eventually get his old job back. (The primary instigator was forced to switch schools) If this child was abused, it is a horrible crime and the teacher should be punished.

However, sometimes kids lash out in ugly ways, let's wait to judge until we hear the whole story.

While we are waiting, how would you like to protect any possible additional victims?

Ouch, I think that response was uncalled for.

Of course, the accused must be placed on some type of leave and have no contact with children. I was just pointing out that he has only been accused by one child so far, and their is a presumption of innocence until proven guilty.
Unless we're back in Salem, or maybe Edenton, North Carolina....

Thanks. I was confused about which "response was uncalled for".

You are most welcome.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I believe in due process, and that's why I think Sidwell has so far handled this about as well as a school can. Especially the school where the President's daughters go. You have to let the authorities do their work. The man is cooperating and it looks like he will have his day in court. It is a horrible situation as this teacher was beloved by many. Due process is one of the many good things about our country and our way of life. At the same time, the school has a primary duty of care for the children who go there too. They must protect them and take reasonable steps to ensure the children are protected from harm.

Police background checks only go so far. But still necessary. Placing a teacher/staff on admin leave is the right thing to do under these kinds of circumstances, and banning him from contact. Then they did fire him when notified that the authorities were pursuing a case. Now if he is found innocent, the damage is indeed irreparable. His reputation (or anyone else's) is forever tinged by such an accusation.

But it looks like he is cooperating and will have his day in court, unlike the (spineless) Toth who fled and has to look over his shoulder wherever he goes the rest of his life.

If your son came home and told you that Petey has been having sex with him for the last few years, would you still believe in due process?

And what if you or better yet, your husband was accused of molesting the little boy who lives next door. The question is, would you want due process for yourself!!

Not exactly the same scenario. Obviously, you loved this guy. So does he have a track record of befriending both male and female students by inviting them to his home? Did he invite more than one child at a time to his home? Perhaps, his wife can collaborate that nothing happened as she was in the room with them or nearby during the accuser's visits.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'd like to say that, in the current situation, the accused is innocent until proven guilty.

Couple years ago a group of adolescent girls made false accusations against a PE teacher in Montgomery County(they were mad at him because he had written up one of their group for not participating) He was eventually cleared, but the damage to his reputation was irreparable.He was placed on administrative leave , but did eventually get his old job back. (The primary instigator was forced to switch schools) If this child was abused, it is a horrible crime and the teacher should be punished.

However, sometimes kids lash out in ugly ways, let's wait to judge until we hear the whole story.

While we are waiting, how would you like to protect any possible additional victims?

Ouch, I think that response was uncalled for.

Of course, the accused must be placed on some type of leave and have no contact with children. I was just pointing out that he has only been accused by one child so far, and their is a presumption of innocence until proven guilty.
Unless we're back in Salem, or maybe Edenton, North Carolina....

Thanks. I was confused about which "response was uncalled for".

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Protection of children, "uncalled for"? Please explain.

You are misquoting me and you know it.

PP, please explain what you mean to say.

I stated that , of course, the teacher should be placed on administrative leave and have no contact with children.
I also stated that that he is innocent until proven guilty.