@roycroftmom , the kids were emotionally manipulated, blackmailed and some families were eventually blackmailed as well. I believe (from the article) that Ray taped the kids making false confessions that he threatened to use against them (and the families), and also there probably was sexual blackmail going on as well from the details in the article. And the girls were pre-primed to help him, being his daughter’s friends and hearing all of his “troubles” and woes while he was in prison.
It also seems that, in true predator style, he went after those that wouldn’t have a strong support system.
@TS0104 very true! A lot of predators do go after those who don’t have a strong support system or don’t have anyone to turn to. They like to go after those who are vulnerable…
Understood. But the school isn’t going to be able to help those who do not want help or will not help themselves. Students can form all sorts of unsavory relationships in college-with drug dealers, abusive lovers, etc. Colleges are loathe to monitor their student’s relationships with others. Yes, I think the school should have a policy of limiting overnight visitors, but ultimately it is the student and the family that need to protect themselves.
If SLC behaved as claimed, then in my opinion it is morally wrong. That said…
On what grounds could anyone sue SLC ? If a college’s security is lax and someone gets in and stabs someone, maybe there’s a case. But when a student meets an unsavory character on campus, follows him to an apartment wholly unaffiliated with SLC in Manhattan and then to some property in North Carolina and in some cases to another home in New Jersey over a span of almost 10 years, I think it would be extremely difficult to prove that SLC’s negligence was the proximate cause of all that followed.
Plus, I suspect that even if someone could make out a case, there’s a good chance it would be barred by the statute of limitations.
Sarah Lawrence should have gotten involved if and when they got word that a parent (or anyone other than those assigned to campus housing) was living in one of their dwellings whether it was dorm room, apartment or house owned by the university. I think a big problem was that the student occupants of apartment were in collusion with the monster. I know of a number of instances where there were extra occupants in university housing that were not evicted.
I too fail to see the basis for a legal claim upon which judicial relief could be granted in this case. I assume the school doesn’t prevent overnight visitors at the request of its student body, which wants the option to so invite guests to their rooms at will.
In the case of a public university, there can be reasons why the university cannot limit the public from the university. However, this definitely is a case where Sarah Lawrence was in control of their private university but chose a laissez fare security protocol.
Will be interesting if SL fights the lawsuits (typical) or tries to help the victims (their students).
@twoinanddone Sad and maddening that theses lives and futures could have been protected if the College had checked, followed up and expelled Ray’s daughter. I couldn’t get The Cut article out of my mind yesterday!
Agreed. This raises the question, why didn’t the College do that, and why didn’t any of the 14 individuals affected (7 roommates, plus at least 1 parent or guardian for each) force adherence to the policy by the College?
@Sue22 Is that today’s policy? Do we know whether the policy was the same back in 2010 when this occurred? Just wondering whether it was more lax back then and they’ve beefed it up as a result of this incident.