The following may include editorial content that is the opinion of the writer.
FAIRFAX COUNTY, VA- Loudoun County, Virginia, has served as “ground zero” in the battle between parents and boards of education.
The Loudoun County school system received some unwanted publicity in 2021 when a parent, Scott Smith, whose daughter had been sexually assaulted in the girl’s bathroom by a boy identifying as a girl, was arrested at a school board meeting for exercising his First Amendment rights.
After the suspect was transferred to another school and committed yet another sexual assault, people began paying attention. The school district lied about the incidents until an investigation found a history of cover-ups, which led to the resignation and subsequent arrest of the superintendent, Scott Ziegler.
What is most disturbing about the arrest of Scott Smith was how the school board used law enforcement officers to violate Mr. Smith’s constitutional rights, particularly his First Amendment right to free speech and his daughter’s right to equal protection under the law.
Sadly, the case in Loudoun County is not an isolated one. All one needs to do is go back to the draconian restrictions implemented in the interests of “public safety” during the COVID pandemic, where police were used as de facto government agents to carry out unconstitutional restrictions in many cases.
Ironically, police were turned loose on people who are typically their biggest supporters. Many in law enforcement watched aghast as police allowed themselves to be used as pawns to further political agendas.
All of this shows a disturbing trend where local school boards are using law enforcement to intimidate parents from speaking out and attending board meetings in the first place. The arrest of Scott Smith in Loudoun County sent a message to parents…a message that was meant to be loud and clear.
“Step out of line, and we will have you arrested.”
A new, equally disturbing trend is emerging where school board administrators use the justice system to bully, intimidate, and silence student victims of sexual assault, rape, and human trafficking.
A district that has flown under the radar somewhat, also in Virginia, is the Fairfax County School Board, which in some ways makes the Loudoun County School Board appear to be amateurs. Parents in Fairfax County watched nervously as Loudoun County flexed its muscles by pressing charges against Scott Smith.
A Culture That Ignores Victim Claims
Fairfax County is one of the wealthiest counties in the country—much of the Washington, D.C. elite call Fairfax County home. This summer, the county had to drop almost $600,000 to settle a case with a former Oakton High School student who alleged the school district mocked her after she reported her sexual assault to a school security guard that had occurred on a 2018 band trip.
The 16-year-old alleged a school security guard told her if she went to court over the case, “she would lose, it would be a waste of money, and ‘the most that could happen to [the assailant] is being charged with battery,’” the Daily Wire reported.
The lawsuit revealed the school district was concerned only about its own liability and not the safety of students. According to emails obtained during discovery, administrators were seen joking about the incident, made reference to the number of “inches” of the assailant’s penis, and to a quote from the movie American Pie, “one time at band camp.” Moreover, the Daily Wire wrote that a judge sanctioned the district for destroying evidence related to the victim’s complaint.
Initially, a jury found the victim, known as Jane Doe, had been sexually harassed, but school administrators bore no responsibility for it. Ms. Doe appealed based on whether school administrators' responsibility to act was invoked once they had “notice or knowledge” of the incident.
Assistant Principal Jennifer Hogan, who was notified of the allegations of nonconsensual sexual activity, dismissed it, claiming she didn’t believe it was such and, therefore, “didn’t have knowledge” of sexual harassment.
Notice of Sexual Assaults and Human Trafficking Raises “One Free Rape Rule”
The Fairfax County sexual assault case appeal was vital to school administrators across the U.S. as it could have set a dangerous, nationwide precedent that would have made it virtually impossible to hold school districts accountable for failing to protect children, according to Monica Beck, a Title IX attorney who was not involved in this case.
“We didn’t have ‘actual knowledge’ [and therefore weren’t required to investigate under Title IX rules] because we didn’t actually know a rape occurred?’ If you don’t investigate, how are you ever going to know for sure that it happened,” Beck asked.
In what seemed to be a bizarre argument, Fairfax County argued that such a case shouldn’t depend on what a “reasonable person” would think what they were hearing was a sexual assault—but instead, it should matter what a school administrator thought.
That argument fell flat with the Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which sided with the victim’s attorney, who said, “It cannot be that a school administrator’s failure to understand what constitutes sexual harassment is an absolute bar to liability.”
The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reinstated the lawsuit, with a majority opinion siding with Ms. Doe that “it was clear that the school system had notice of the assault because the girl herself told administrators she’d been touched without her consent,” as reported by the Associated Press.
The entire 4th Circuit then issued an en banc opinion affirming that the suit should be reinstated. The majority opinion argued that allowing “schools involved in Title IX lawsuits to avoid liability simply by arguing that they did not know that the report described sexual harassment. . . would undermine Congress’s goal of protecting students from sexual discrimination in education, as it would create “perverse incentives” for schools to refrain from training their staff to identify instances of sexual harassment better as well as from investigating reports of harassment—to avoid ever acquiring actual notice.”
The perverse incentive essentially would provide not only provide a “one free rape rule” scenario but that would then lead to a perpetual avoidance of acquiring actual notice.
Fairfax County was attempting to have the court implement a “one free rape” rule, according to Appellate Judge James Wynn, noting the district argued that the assault “was committed by another student and the school had no prior warning it would occur, such as a previous infraction.”
Wynn wrote, “…the statute itself makes it plain that a school may be held liable when it makes a student vulnerable to sexual harassment by their peers, and by extension traffickers, such as by failing to respond appropriately after learning of an initial incident of sexual assault.”
Fairfax County Public Schools tried to get the court before the United States Supreme Court; however, last November, the high court refused to grant certiorari. Fairfax County quietly settled the case in May, agreeing to pay the student $587,500. However, as part of the settlement, the School Board “does not admit any wrongdoing, fault, or liability of any kind whatsoever.
”
The incident is ironic in that in 2014, the National Women’s Law Center filed a Title IX complaint on behalf of a parent and her daughter, alleging that the Fairfax County Public School District discriminated against the student by failing “to promptly and appropriately respond to notice that students at the school were sexually harassing the student.” The District also settled that complaint but evidently forgot about it when the 2017 case arose.
The District agreed to distribute an anti-harassment statement to “all Division students, parents, and staff via e-mail…stating that the Division does not tolerate acts of sexual or gender-based harassment. The statement will encourage any student who believes he or she has been subjected to sexual or gender-based harassment to report the harassment to the Division and note the Division’s commitment to conducting a prompt investigation.”
The District further agreed to a series of policies and procedures regarding sexual harassment, including “mandatory reporting by teachers, administrators, and staff of alleged sex discrimination of which they become aware, including sexual harassment.”
Broken Promises by Fairfax County School Board Towards Victims of Human Trafficking
Actions, however, seem to be louder than words. This past August, the Fairfax County Times published a chilling article where some Fairfax County School Board members allegedly blocked a local mother from testifying about her daughter’s experience whereby she was reportedly trafficked during school hours at a local high school, taken to a nearby home where she was sold for sex, and then returned for the end of school.
Though the incidents of this case occurred before the Jane Doe Oakton sexual assault case, this case record arose after Jane Doe and involved a girl named Kate. After settling the Oakton matter, the school board’s actions starkly contrast the promises made in their Doe settlement.
At this point, the disturbing trend of the current 12-member, Democrat-controlled Fairfax County School Board’s use of the legal system to bully, intimidate, silence, and retraumatize trafficking victims becomes evident.
The mother, who used the name Susan Young as a pseudonym to protect her identity, was scheduled to sit for a deposition in the civil trial of the student in the 2011-12 case known as “Kate.” That incident occurred around the same time Young’s daughter was sexually assaulted. In the case of “Kate, she was sexually harassed and raped by students and others at the Rachel Carson Middle School in Herndon, Virginia in 2011 and 2012. Due to her family’s experience, Young has become a spokesperson in the fight against trafficking.
In the civil case, Civil NO. 1:19-cv-00917.RDA-TCB, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, the plaintiffs allege the Fairfax County Public Schools engaged in a coverup when she approached school officials with allegations of sexual harassment that led to the eventual rape and sexual assault. The assailants were named in the lawsuit.
In a bizarre twist, the Fairfax County School Board, in what can only be described as an apparent effort to retraumatize “Kate,” demanded the opportunity to interview “A.M.,” “Kate’s” fiancée to see if he could verify “Kate’s” “picture of herself” as traumatized from the decade-old sexual assault. Lawyers for the board argued, “At numerous points in this case, Plaintiff has painted a picture of herself as physically and mentally incapacitated. Last month, Plaintiff revealed in discovery that she met, began dating, and became engaged to A.M. in the past two years. As her live-in fiancée, A.M. has first-hand knowledge about Plaintiff’s physical and mental health.”
So, what the school board is attempting to accomplish through its legal counsel is to, in essence, demand a “breach of confidence” between “Kate” and her fiancée.
Worse yet, school board members demanded A.M. provide photos of his relationship with “Kate.” More egregious, lawyers for the Fairfax County School board demanded vaginal and anal exams of “Kate” to confirm if she had “internal derangement of her vagina, cervix, uterus and anus” from the alleged sexual assault in 2011-12.
When attorneys for the school board learned Young was to be deposed, they went to court to block her testimony, a motion that U.S. Magistrate William Fitzpatrick granted. It was apparently okay to impose a gag order on Ms. Young. At the same time, he demanded “Kate’s” fiancée provide intimate details of her trauma based on his completely unprofessional opinion.
That denial may mean little, however, since Ms. Young is already on the record where she declared in court that her daughter “was sex trafficked when she was a freshman in high school around 2011,” the same time “Kate” was likewise a victim of sex trafficking.
Young identified one of the traffickers as “a student” at the school and described him as a “known gang affiliate.”
She also noted, “School records indicate that my daughter attempted to see her school guidance counsel over twenty (20) times to seek help when she was being trafficked in school.”
Continuing, she said, “During this period of time, Defendant FCSB [Fairfax County School Board] was well aware of sex trafficking occurring in and around the school district and was aware of the circumstances relating to my daughter’s sexual abuse.” She added, “Defendant FCSB was aware individuals affiliated with gangs were students in the FCPS system.”
Attorneys for “Kate” told the court that Young “would testify to the facts and circumstances of her daughter’s trafficking, FCPS’ knowledge regarding trafficking occurring within the school system, and her personal knowledge relating to other victims, which are similar, if not identical, to the horrible sexual abuse and violence that Plaintiff suffered while she was a student within the FCPS system.”
Young’s deposition was believed to prove that Fairfax County school board members “had actual or constructive knowledge of sex trafficking occurring within their school during the same period when Plaintiff was sex trafficked.”
Using Lawyers as Weapons of Retraumatization: A Tactic or Pattern of Intimidation
It seems clear that the Fairfax County School Board and its attorneys are attempting to make a mockery of the process. For example, attorneys for “Kate” allege that school board lawyers, as well as school officials, openly mocked her during a full-day deposition, which a judge has extended for another seven hours in what is referred to as an “enlargement of time” motion, over protests from “Kate’s” attorneys.
While defense attorneys deny any such mockery occurred, a transcript of the deposition shows Melissa Fry Hague, an attorney for “Kate,” interrupted her deposition to say, “Objection to the laughing, laughing at the end of the table, we would appreciate during the deposition.”
“It was a scoff, not a laugh,” responded Bruce Blanchard, defense attorney for the FCSB.
“We would appreciate it if you would not scoff,” Hague replied, again asking defense attorneys later in the deposition to stop “laughing or mocking throughout this deposition.”
Jamie Forbes, a sexual assault victim in the 1980s as a high school freshman, called Fairfax County to task over how they handle the sexual assault and sex trafficking cases.
Fairfax County’s government allegedly promotes a “Trauma-Informed Community Network,” which involves public school staff. However, the hostile nature being put forth by the Fairfax County Public School District toward “Kate” is typical.
“They are potentially intentionally trying to retraumatize the alleged victim so that she drops the case. Unfortunately, it is a common pattern with schools if they are focused on suppressing cases instead of understanding how to care for anyone who has been harmed,” said Forbes.
And that appears to be precisely what the 12 Democrats who sit on the Fairfax County School board are attempting to do.
“Kate” filed a motion in court where she alleges the school board demanded an extension on her deposition after she had already been “triggered and retraumatized” during an astounding June 19 deposition, which lasted 11.5 hours. This was where defense attorneys “admittedly mocked her” and waited about nine hours into the deposition for unknown reasons before asking her “about the allegations of sexual abuse and rape.”
The first actual question she was asked came about 90 minutes later when an attorney for the FCSB asked her, “Okay. When is the first conversation you recall having with your mom about being gang raped?”
The very next day, school board members again demanded “Kate” show up for more depositions, claiming “Kate” had “parroted” issues with PTSD and traumatic brain injuries from the sexual assaults. That was the so-called “enlargement of time” motion granted by a judge.
Despite “Kate” providing nearly 29,000 pages of documents, including “thousands of emails, treatment records, text messages, academic records, employment records, resumes and social media posts, messages, and/or communications,” with her mother, father, and brother producing an additional 14,000 pages of records, school board lawyers have requested a “forensic” collection of communications between the plaintiff and her family.
“Kate’s” attorney, Karin Sweighart, called the episode a “horrific situation” in an interview with Fox 5 Washington DC.
“It started small, and it just continued to escalate, and Fairfax County knew about it at the beginning,” Sweighart said. “They knew this. They brushed it off. They swept it under the rug.”
According to the outlet, the names of staff involved in the initial coverup are being protected, which means those who helped cover up the incident could still be working in the school or the classroom.
‘I think parents have the right to know if there is an allegation that a school official didn’t take the action to protect minor students that they should have, and that’s one of the unfortunate things here,” Sweighart said.
In a statement sent to Fox 5, the victim said:
“When I was sexually abused, Fairfax County Public Schools ignored my cries for help and retaliated against me. Teachers and principals are responsible for the safety of children in their care. They must protect them from all types of violence, including sexual abuse and trafficking. FCPS, a powerful institution, continues to deny responsibility, even 11 years later. I am seeking justice not only for myself but the hundreds of nameless victims out there who have been abused in FCPS. I want to prevent this from happening to another child.”
There is no other conclusion to make other than this was an attempt to traumatize further and humiliate a victim of sexual assault. What makes this particularly disturbing is that one of the current school board members who served during both legal battles has a history of encouraging weaponization of the legal system to target, intimidate, and harass. A 2009 Memorandum written and distributed by Karl Frisch while he worked with Media Matters was leaked to and covered by The Daily Caller.
In that memo, now Fairfax County School Board Member Karl Frisch called for hiring “private investigators to look into the personal lives of Fox News anchors, hosts, reporters, prominent contributors, senior network and corporate staff,” according to The Daily Caller.
In the same memo, Frisch argued that, after the spying on his competitor's staff, “should come the legal assault: “We should look into contracting with a major law firm to study any available legal actions that can be taken against Fox News, from a class action lawsuit to defamation claims for those wronged by the network. I imagine this would be difficult, but the right law firm is bound to find some legal ground for us to take action against the network.”
Given these revelations and those made by the current Fairfax County School Board members and their attorneys targeting Jane Doe, Kate, and their families and the tactics suggested by current School Board member Karl Frisch, it is difficult not to see a pattern forming.
How likely is it that one of these family members could have shown up at a school board meeting as Scott Smith did, and with the trauma of having their loved one sexually abused…or trafficked…spoke out as Scott Smith did and saw themselves physically restrained and arrested?
Lawmakers were encouraged during 2020-2021 because they could use law enforcement to achieve political ends. That mindset has continued. We now see law enforcement being used to target political enemies, such as pro-life advocates or those who believe there was something wrong with the 2020 election.
When police were assaulted at will in 2020 after George Floyd’s untimely demise, primarily parents and suburban moms and dads were defending them. It was right-leaning, principally conservative, or middle-of-the-road moderates and independents who spoke out against the violence directed toward law enforcement. How have they been repaid? Ask Scott Smith. Ask parents who have seen the power of the U.S. Department of Justice to refer to them as extremists, all for the “crime” of protecting their children.
It is completely understood that police officers are there to serve and protect and bring a paycheck home to their families. But at what point will police officers stand up and say no? When will they obey their oath when they are given the privilege of carrying a badge?
When push comes to shove, leftists such as those on the Fairfax County School Board or the Loudoun County School Board will not be there to stand up for the police. And if the police have turned their supporters against them, then who will back up the Thin Blue Line?
The case in Fairfax County is about much more than a poor young girl who was sexually assaulted. It is more than other girls who were trafficked for sex. It is about the power elite attempting to use the legal system to further political ends. And who loses in the end? Parents, their children, and the police.
FAIRFAX COUNTY, VA- Loudoun County, Virginia, has served as “ground zero” in the battle between parents and boards of education.
The Loudoun County school system received some unwanted publicity in 2021 when a parent, Scott Smith, whose daughter had been sexually assaulted in the girl’s bathroom by a boy identifying as a girl, was arrested at a school board meeting for exercising his First Amendment rights.
After the suspect was transferred to another school and committed yet another sexual assault, people began paying attention. The school district lied about the incidents until an investigation found a history of cover-ups, which led to the resignation and subsequent arrest of the superintendent, Scott Ziegler.
What is most disturbing about the arrest of Scott Smith was how the school board used law enforcement officers to violate Mr. Smith’s constitutional rights, particularly his First Amendment right to free speech and his daughter’s right to equal protection under the law.
Sadly, the case in Loudoun County is not an isolated one. All one needs to do is go back to the draconian restrictions implemented in the interests of “public safety” during the COVID pandemic, where police were used as de facto government agents to carry out unconstitutional restrictions in many cases.
Ironically, police were turned loose on people who are typically their biggest supporters. Many in law enforcement watched aghast as police allowed themselves to be used as pawns to further political agendas.
All of this shows a disturbing trend where local school boards are using law enforcement to intimidate parents from speaking out and attending board meetings in the first place. The arrest of Scott Smith in Loudoun County sent a message to parents…a message that was meant to be loud and clear.
“Step out of line, and we will have you arrested.”
A new, equally disturbing trend is emerging where school board administrators use the justice system to bully, intimidate, and silence student victims of sexual assault, rape, and human trafficking.
A district that has flown under the radar somewhat, also in Virginia, is the Fairfax County School Board, which in some ways makes the Loudoun County School Board appear to be amateurs. Parents in Fairfax County watched nervously as Loudoun County flexed its muscles by pressing charges against Scott Smith.
A Culture That Ignores Victim Claims
Fairfax County is one of the wealthiest counties in the country—much of the Washington, D.C. elite call Fairfax County home. This summer, the county had to drop almost $600,000 to settle a case with a former Oakton High School student who alleged the school district mocked her after she reported her sexual assault to a school security guard that had occurred on a 2018 band trip.
The 16-year-old alleged a school security guard told her if she went to court over the case, “she would lose, it would be a waste of money, and ‘the most that could happen to [the assailant] is being charged with battery,’” the Daily Wire reported.
The lawsuit revealed the school district was concerned only about its own liability and not the safety of students. According to emails obtained during discovery, administrators were seen joking about the incident, made reference to the number of “inches” of the assailant’s penis, and to a quote from the movie American Pie, “one time at band camp.” Moreover, the Daily Wire wrote that a judge sanctioned the district for destroying evidence related to the victim’s complaint.
Initially, a jury found the victim, known as Jane Doe, had been sexually harassed, but school administrators bore no responsibility for it. Ms. Doe appealed based on whether school administrators' responsibility to act was invoked once they had “notice or knowledge” of the incident.
Assistant Principal Jennifer Hogan, who was notified of the allegations of nonconsensual sexual activity, dismissed it, claiming she didn’t believe it was such and, therefore, “didn’t have knowledge” of sexual harassment.
Notice of Sexual Assaults and Human Trafficking Raises “One Free Rape Rule”
The Fairfax County sexual assault case appeal was vital to school administrators across the U.S. as it could have set a dangerous, nationwide precedent that would have made it virtually impossible to hold school districts accountable for failing to protect children, according to Monica Beck, a Title IX attorney who was not involved in this case.
“We didn’t have ‘actual knowledge’ [and therefore weren’t required to investigate under Title IX rules] because we didn’t actually know a rape occurred?’ If you don’t investigate, how are you ever going to know for sure that it happened,” Beck asked.
In what seemed to be a bizarre argument, Fairfax County argued that such a case shouldn’t depend on what a “reasonable person” would think what they were hearing was a sexual assault—but instead, it should matter what a school administrator thought.
That argument fell flat with the Fourth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which sided with the victim’s attorney, who said, “It cannot be that a school administrator’s failure to understand what constitutes sexual harassment is an absolute bar to liability.”
The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reinstated the lawsuit, with a majority opinion siding with Ms. Doe that “it was clear that the school system had notice of the assault because the girl herself told administrators she’d been touched without her consent,” as reported by the Associated Press.
The entire 4th Circuit then issued an en banc opinion affirming that the suit should be reinstated. The majority opinion argued that allowing “schools involved in Title IX lawsuits to avoid liability simply by arguing that they did not know that the report described sexual harassment. . . would undermine Congress’s goal of protecting students from sexual discrimination in education, as it would create “perverse incentives” for schools to refrain from training their staff to identify instances of sexual harassment better as well as from investigating reports of harassment—to avoid ever acquiring actual notice.”
The perverse incentive essentially would provide not only provide a “one free rape rule” scenario but that would then lead to a perpetual avoidance of acquiring actual notice.
Fairfax County was attempting to have the court implement a “one free rape” rule, according to Appellate Judge James Wynn, noting the district argued that the assault “was committed by another student and the school had no prior warning it would occur, such as a previous infraction.”
Wynn wrote, “…the statute itself makes it plain that a school may be held liable when it makes a student vulnerable to sexual harassment by their peers, and by extension traffickers, such as by failing to respond appropriately after learning of an initial incident of sexual assault.”
Fairfax County Public Schools tried to get the court before the United States Supreme Court; however, last November, the high court refused to grant certiorari. Fairfax County quietly settled the case in May, agreeing to pay the student $587,500. However, as part of the settlement, the School Board “does not admit any wrongdoing, fault, or liability of any kind whatsoever.
”
The incident is ironic in that in 2014, the National Women’s Law Center filed a Title IX complaint on behalf of a parent and her daughter, alleging that the Fairfax County Public School District discriminated against the student by failing “to promptly and appropriately respond to notice that students at the school were sexually harassing the student.” The District also settled that complaint but evidently forgot about it when the 2017 case arose.
The District agreed to distribute an anti-harassment statement to “all Division students, parents, and staff via e-mail…stating that the Division does not tolerate acts of sexual or gender-based harassment. The statement will encourage any student who believes he or she has been subjected to sexual or gender-based harassment to report the harassment to the Division and note the Division’s commitment to conducting a prompt investigation.”
The District further agreed to a series of policies and procedures regarding sexual harassment, including “mandatory reporting by teachers, administrators, and staff of alleged sex discrimination of which they become aware, including sexual harassment.”
Broken Promises by Fairfax County School Board Towards Victims of Human Trafficking
Actions, however, seem to be louder than words. This past August, the Fairfax County Times published a chilling article where some Fairfax County School Board members allegedly blocked a local mother from testifying about her daughter’s experience whereby she was reportedly trafficked during school hours at a local high school, taken to a nearby home where she was sold for sex, and then returned for the end of school.
Though the incidents of this case occurred before the Jane Doe Oakton sexual assault case, this case record arose after Jane Doe and involved a girl named Kate. After settling the Oakton matter, the school board’s actions starkly contrast the promises made in their Doe settlement.
At this point, the disturbing trend of the current 12-member, Democrat-controlled Fairfax County School Board’s use of the legal system to bully, intimidate, silence, and retraumatize trafficking victims becomes evident.
The mother, who used the name Susan Young as a pseudonym to protect her identity, was scheduled to sit for a deposition in the civil trial of the student in the 2011-12 case known as “Kate.” That incident occurred around the same time Young’s daughter was sexually assaulted. In the case of “Kate, she was sexually harassed and raped by students and others at the Rachel Carson Middle School in Herndon, Virginia in 2011 and 2012. Due to her family’s experience, Young has become a spokesperson in the fight against trafficking.
In the civil case, Civil NO. 1:19-cv-00917.RDA-TCB, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, the plaintiffs allege the Fairfax County Public Schools engaged in a coverup when she approached school officials with allegations of sexual harassment that led to the eventual rape and sexual assault. The assailants were named in the lawsuit.
In a bizarre twist, the Fairfax County School Board, in what can only be described as an apparent effort to retraumatize “Kate,” demanded the opportunity to interview “A.M.,” “Kate’s” fiancée to see if he could verify “Kate’s” “picture of herself” as traumatized from the decade-old sexual assault. Lawyers for the board argued, “At numerous points in this case, Plaintiff has painted a picture of herself as physically and mentally incapacitated. Last month, Plaintiff revealed in discovery that she met, began dating, and became engaged to A.M. in the past two years. As her live-in fiancée, A.M. has first-hand knowledge about Plaintiff’s physical and mental health.”
So, what the school board is attempting to accomplish through its legal counsel is to, in essence, demand a “breach of confidence” between “Kate” and her fiancée.
Worse yet, school board members demanded A.M. provide photos of his relationship with “Kate.” More egregious, lawyers for the Fairfax County School board demanded vaginal and anal exams of “Kate” to confirm if she had “internal derangement of her vagina, cervix, uterus and anus” from the alleged sexual assault in 2011-12.
When attorneys for the school board learned Young was to be deposed, they went to court to block her testimony, a motion that U.S. Magistrate William Fitzpatrick granted. It was apparently okay to impose a gag order on Ms. Young. At the same time, he demanded “Kate’s” fiancée provide intimate details of her trauma based on his completely unprofessional opinion.
That denial may mean little, however, since Ms. Young is already on the record where she declared in court that her daughter “was sex trafficked when she was a freshman in high school around 2011,” the same time “Kate” was likewise a victim of sex trafficking.
Young identified one of the traffickers as “a student” at the school and described him as a “known gang affiliate.”
She also noted, “School records indicate that my daughter attempted to see her school guidance counsel over twenty (20) times to seek help when she was being trafficked in school.”
Continuing, she said, “During this period of time, Defendant FCSB [Fairfax County School Board] was well aware of sex trafficking occurring in and around the school district and was aware of the circumstances relating to my daughter’s sexual abuse.” She added, “Defendant FCSB was aware individuals affiliated with gangs were students in the FCPS system.”
Attorneys for “Kate” told the court that Young “would testify to the facts and circumstances of her daughter’s trafficking, FCPS’ knowledge regarding trafficking occurring within the school system, and her personal knowledge relating to other victims, which are similar, if not identical, to the horrible sexual abuse and violence that Plaintiff suffered while she was a student within the FCPS system.”
Young’s deposition was believed to prove that Fairfax County school board members “had actual or constructive knowledge of sex trafficking occurring within their school during the same period when Plaintiff was sex trafficked.”
Using Lawyers as Weapons of Retraumatization: A Tactic or Pattern of Intimidation
It seems clear that the Fairfax County School Board and its attorneys are attempting to make a mockery of the process. For example, attorneys for “Kate” allege that school board lawyers, as well as school officials, openly mocked her during a full-day deposition, which a judge has extended for another seven hours in what is referred to as an “enlargement of time” motion, over protests from “Kate’s” attorneys.
While defense attorneys deny any such mockery occurred, a transcript of the deposition shows Melissa Fry Hague, an attorney for “Kate,” interrupted her deposition to say, “Objection to the laughing, laughing at the end of the table, we would appreciate during the deposition.”
“It was a scoff, not a laugh,” responded Bruce Blanchard, defense attorney for the FCSB.
“We would appreciate it if you would not scoff,” Hague replied, again asking defense attorneys later in the deposition to stop “laughing or mocking throughout this deposition.”
Jamie Forbes, a sexual assault victim in the 1980s as a high school freshman, called Fairfax County to task over how they handle the sexual assault and sex trafficking cases.
Fairfax County’s government allegedly promotes a “Trauma-Informed Community Network,” which involves public school staff. However, the hostile nature being put forth by the Fairfax County Public School District toward “Kate” is typical.
“They are potentially intentionally trying to retraumatize the alleged victim so that she drops the case. Unfortunately, it is a common pattern with schools if they are focused on suppressing cases instead of understanding how to care for anyone who has been harmed,” said Forbes.
And that appears to be precisely what the 12 Democrats who sit on the Fairfax County School board are attempting to do.
“Kate” filed a motion in court where she alleges the school board demanded an extension on her deposition after she had already been “triggered and retraumatized” during an astounding June 19 deposition, which lasted 11.5 hours. This was where defense attorneys “admittedly mocked her” and waited about nine hours into the deposition for unknown reasons before asking her “about the allegations of sexual abuse and rape.”
The first actual question she was asked came about 90 minutes later when an attorney for the FCSB asked her, “Okay. When is the first conversation you recall having with your mom about being gang raped?”
The very next day, school board members again demanded “Kate” show up for more depositions, claiming “Kate” had “parroted” issues with PTSD and traumatic brain injuries from the sexual assaults. That was the so-called “enlargement of time” motion granted by a judge.
Despite “Kate” providing nearly 29,000 pages of documents, including “thousands of emails, treatment records, text messages, academic records, employment records, resumes and social media posts, messages, and/or communications,” with her mother, father, and brother producing an additional 14,000 pages of records, school board lawyers have requested a “forensic” collection of communications between the plaintiff and her family.
“Kate’s” attorney, Karin Sweighart, called the episode a “horrific situation” in an interview with Fox 5 Washington DC.
“It started small, and it just continued to escalate, and Fairfax County knew about it at the beginning,” Sweighart said. “They knew this. They brushed it off. They swept it under the rug.”
According to the outlet, the names of staff involved in the initial coverup are being protected, which means those who helped cover up the incident could still be working in the school or the classroom.
‘I think parents have the right to know if there is an allegation that a school official didn’t take the action to protect minor students that they should have, and that’s one of the unfortunate things here,” Sweighart said.
In a statement sent to Fox 5, the victim said:
“When I was sexually abused, Fairfax County Public Schools ignored my cries for help and retaliated against me. Teachers and principals are responsible for the safety of children in their care. They must protect them from all types of violence, including sexual abuse and trafficking. FCPS, a powerful institution, continues to deny responsibility, even 11 years later. I am seeking justice not only for myself but the hundreds of nameless victims out there who have been abused in FCPS. I want to prevent this from happening to another child.”
There is no other conclusion to make other than this was an attempt to traumatize further and humiliate a victim of sexual assault. What makes this particularly disturbing is that one of the current school board members who served during both legal battles has a history of encouraging weaponization of the legal system to target, intimidate, and harass. A 2009 Memorandum written and distributed by Karl Frisch while he worked with Media Matters was leaked to and covered by The Daily Caller.
In that memo, now Fairfax County School Board Member Karl Frisch called for hiring “private investigators to look into the personal lives of Fox News anchors, hosts, reporters, prominent contributors, senior network and corporate staff,” according to The Daily Caller.
In the same memo, Frisch argued that, after the spying on his competitor's staff, “should come the legal assault: “We should look into contracting with a major law firm to study any available legal actions that can be taken against Fox News, from a class action lawsuit to defamation claims for those wronged by the network. I imagine this would be difficult, but the right law firm is bound to find some legal ground for us to take action against the network.”
Given these revelations and those made by the current Fairfax County School Board members and their attorneys targeting Jane Doe, Kate, and their families and the tactics suggested by current School Board member Karl Frisch, it is difficult not to see a pattern forming.
How likely is it that one of these family members could have shown up at a school board meeting as Scott Smith did, and with the trauma of having their loved one sexually abused…or trafficked…spoke out as Scott Smith did and saw themselves physically restrained and arrested?
Lawmakers were encouraged during 2020-2021 because they could use law enforcement to achieve political ends. That mindset has continued. We now see law enforcement being used to target political enemies, such as pro-life advocates or those who believe there was something wrong with the 2020 election.
When police were assaulted at will in 2020 after George Floyd’s untimely demise, primarily parents and suburban moms and dads were defending them. It was right-leaning, principally conservative, or middle-of-the-road moderates and independents who spoke out against the violence directed toward law enforcement. How have they been repaid? Ask Scott Smith. Ask parents who have seen the power of the U.S. Department of Justice to refer to them as extremists, all for the “crime” of protecting their children.
It is completely understood that police officers are there to serve and protect and bring a paycheck home to their families. But at what point will police officers stand up and say no? When will they obey their oath when they are given the privilege of carrying a badge?
When push comes to shove, leftists such as those on the Fairfax County School Board or the Loudoun County School Board will not be there to stand up for the police. And if the police have turned their supporters against them, then who will back up the Thin Blue Line?
The case in Fairfax County is about much more than a poor young girl who was sexually assaulted. It is more than other girls who were trafficked for sex. It is about the power elite attempting to use the legal system to further political ends. And who loses in the end? Parents, their children, and the police.
For corrections or revisions, click here.
The opinions reflected in this article are not necessarily the opinions of LET
Comments