IllianaLancerContra

New Cadets Sexual Assault Accusation

Recommended Posts

What stands out to me in March moms post is apparently formal investigation was done 4/30/2019 IOW about 10 weeks ago and woman who sent the letter is upset that YEAs investigation took so long. As mm states YEA and DCI should not have been investigating anything until formal one(s) was/were done. So what did the minors mom expect?

And yes the mom who sent the letter left enough clues that identity of her kid could be determined by some. As someone who gets beat over the head with personal information security at work.. wow... just wow

Edited by JimF-LowBari
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read the letter. We don’t know enough to draw conclusions about anything. So perhaps we should stop inferring motive and trying to pick apart details. We just don’t know. I have nothing else to say except I feel profoundly sad.  

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Spatzzz said:

Not going to comment on the details of the story because I'm sure there is more to the story and I'll wait for all of the details to come out to form a full opinion.

With that said I will say this. The BOD, Director and Staff knew of this issue/allegation last year. Knowing that and knowing their recent history I am even more dumbfounded that they decided it a good choice to depict a woman getting assaulted and her clothes ripped off and then assaulted again on a staircase at the tour premiere. Yes, it has been changed a little since but where are the adults in the organization that should have said no from the moment it was talked about as a choice in design meetings. Maybe they did not and never will learn. Completely and utterly tone-deaf and clueless to their current situation.

Totally agree 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Eleran said:

The mother's letter specifically stated "we requested that they offer us a settlement".

That seems important.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Spatzzz said:

The women Hopkins allegedly assaulted went back to the Cadets and also didn't want to come forward because of the damage they thought it would do to the organization. So is it REALLY that odd that the kid wanted to go back? Did we learn nothing from the last episode?

I agree it's valuable to remember that victims of sexual assault do sometimes later put themselves back in the presence of their attackers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty much my point is the same as Hockey Dad.  There is much going on here and we need to be careful.

In this regard, I was reading about policies on another site. Cadets have a written policy of one person in one bed so it appears.  Clearly, this was violated as all agree there were two people per bed. Here begins the concern. 

Am I the only one who is not taken back when I read this text from the kid to the director as contained in the police report.

When it happened,-   XXXX  said he messaged the director, at 6:0I  A.M. The incident occurred about 15 minutes prior. The message to the director, Scott Litzenberg, stated the following, "Scott, I just woke up in the middle of the night and  XXXX   was under the covers and he put my **** in his mouth and I am so insanely disgusted and scared
right now I don't know what to do. I want to leave the room I'm scared. Like I'm not even kidding. He pulled down my underwear as I was asleep. I can't sleep anymore."

 

How is this not an issue? I guess the kid could be lying? Heaven knows in this world today people to not always tell the truth.  How do we write this one off as a crazy parent looking for cash? Not that it will happen but I think we should all be silent for a while. 


 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tim K said:

Where it involves minors, you have to be careful what you say, not to save yourself but to protect the minors. When a case involves two minors, confidentiality is critical, and attention has to be paid to not risk the release of names. In my state it is recommended that law enforcement makes all public statements on incidents involving schools when it involves minors. If it involves a clear situation where adult supervision is lacking, such as hazing, a school may make a statement, but in a situation involving students, sending out a statement saying they are aware of an incident and an investigation is ongoing is probably not advised. 

Yes, this seems like a particularly difficult situation for Cadets' staff to have found themselves in. I hope the immediately sought the advice of their lawyers when the incident was first reported.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, March mom said:

There’s a few things that stand out:

1-  The two persons involved were both minors. That is not something you publicly announce. 

2-  There was both a criminal and a child protective investigation. The child protective investigation was determined as Unsubstantiated with no findings, and report was closed. 

it is not clear from what I read if there was an actual arrest?  The words "testify" and "testimony," which are court-related words, are used in the email, but I do not see any other reference that would indicate there was a court or trial proceeding, but either way, what would a DCI investigation do that a criminal/CPS investigation was not already doing? There are many times that independent investigations hold off until the formal investigations are complete (which appears to be 4/30/2019 by review of the CPS record).

It appears that both child protective and the police were contacted immediately.

3-  Approximately six months after this incident, and still during the open CPS report, this person returned to the Cadets for an audition. It appears that after he was cut, further resolution was sought.

4-  Various photo evidence, showing the other child after the incident was outlined. However, his presence, such as the group photo at Finals or some of the other times he appeared in photographs does not mean that he was without supervision/monitoring.

5-  I 100% agree that this must of been agonizing to have gone through and the other child should not have had the ability to return to the room. I am definitely not defending that point. I am however struggling to see where the Cadets' failure was.

6-  The writer of the email indicates that she was not contacted until CPS contacted her. She also writes that the guardian asked why she was not contacted...  But I am left wondering if the guardian was contacted first?  As this would be reaching out to notify of the incident.

7-  I am glad that this child found another place to march.

8-  I am disheartened that the writer of this email chose to disclose the name of her son and then the physical characteristics and month/year of the other child.

These are excellent points that show we don't know enough about this story to make informed judgements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Amazed&Stunned said:

How is this not an issue? I guess the kid could be lying? Heaven knows in this world today people to not always tell the truth.  How do we write this one off as a crazy parent looking for cash? Not that it will happen but I think we should all be silent for a while.

We need to know more. If the incident happened as described, one would hope that Child Protective Services wouldn't have closed the report without action (as is said to have happened). But who knows?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Tim K said:

Where it involves minors, you have to be careful what you say, not to save yourself but to protect the minors. When a case involves two minors, confidentiality is critical, and attention has to be paid to not risk the release of names. In my state it is recommended that law enforcement makes all public statements on incidents involving schools when it involves minors. If it involves a clear situation where adult supervision is lacking, such as hazing, a school may make a statement, but in a situation involving students, sending out a statement saying they are aware of an incident and an investigation is ongoing is probably not advised. 

shame the Mom didn't do a thorough job of redacting info in the letter she sent around

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.