@GnocchiB He still shows up on the faculty listing on the school website.
Somehow I think that advisor took leave knowing that the Rev was going to try and resolve things on his own. The school’s policy specifically enumerates the sanctions available for a “major offense.” A “bread deal” is not among them.
Really, when you think of it the whole thing is patently ridiculous.
What also slays me about this whole thing is that this case was unfolding in the midst of all the trials, fallout and media circus of the Laurie case. In light of that, one would think Exeter would bend over backwards to make sure they dotted every i and crossed every t in handling things correctly. But no, they definitely didn’t.
Unwanted physical touching on breasts and butt is sexual assault. What kind of morons do they employ at Exeter who can’t recognize sexual assault when they hear about it, and why are these offenders still employed?
“What kind of morons do they employ at Exeter who can’t recognize sexual assault when they hear about it.”
I think they did recognize it but he is a popular athlete.
From the little in the story, sexual harassment for sure, but it doesn’t sound like sexual assault to me. In the workplace guidance the EEOC defines harassment as unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature. In my kids’ former HS handbook sexual harassment was also defined this way and was subject to disciplinary action, but it did not specify what that action would be. I’m sure schools, public and private, handle each case individually. I don’t think bread baking is appropriate, but perhaps stepping down from a leadership post for a period of time would suffice. Depending on our the state in this article defines it’s criminal sexual behavior laws, it’s possible the family would have recourse in the judicial system, but that feels alittle extreme to me for juveniles. I agree that both sets of parents should have been notified if the two young people were juveniles.
Well we would have to know more specifics. But from the bare bones description in the article it could potentially fall under both definitions as defined in Exeter’s policy:
Sexual harassment includes:
Sexual assault is defined as :
Now I think one could argue quite successfully that the described behavior was more in line with “sexual contact” than it was with merely “offensive touching.” Especially because he allegedly went underneath her clothing.
Who aside from a medical professional or a “foundations” fitter touches a woman’s breast (clothed or otherwise) for a non-sexual reason???
If I’m not allowed to bare it in public, you cannot touch it!
Obviously, the State of New Hampshire considers it misdemeanor sexual assault as that is what he is charged with. So, yeah, legally sexual assault.
And, in @LucieTheLakie’s example, the medical professional and the fitter are both touching WITH permission.
I read that he’s being charged with misdemeanor assault and assuming it’s Class A my guess is probation and a fine if it gets to that point. It looks like they are both graduated seniors and off most likely to different places both forever memorialized on the internet.
I’m wondering if Penn has rescinded his offer of admission or is waiting for the court case to unfold.
I’m wondering why her name was disclosed. Perhaps she consented to it; maybe even initiated the involvement of the press to get things moving, but I personally would not permit my daughter to put her name out there in this context.
@prospect1 I wondered that as well. I think the girl has a bit of an agenda . Assuming the story is 100% accurate, I think the described groping is offensive and inappropriate . He should be reprimanded and punished in some way. However, really this is assault?
The state obviously thinks so. That’s why the guy was arrested.
@doschicos yes charged with a misdemeanor sexual assault
As the parent of an Exeter student, this story was tough to read. I have met or communicated with all of the PEA school officials referenced in the article, at some point, during the past school year. My son is a student/athlete at PEA, and therefore knows the alleged perpetrator. Exeter is, well…Exeter. It was a great honor for my son to be accepted as a student. Just some of the reasons this is a difficult incident to digest.
Having said that, it’s crucial to be objective. On two occasions this year, my son had to attend ‘hearings’ at which dorm mates ( I believe that was his connection in each case ) were being charged with, as he termed it, ‘rape’. He may have been taking liberties with the term, and it may have been ‘sexual assault’ he meant to say. Admittedly we didn’t discuss these incidents in depth, but I do recall him saying that 1 of the 2 students was removed from school. When I commented on the harshness of that, his reply was that " It’s not that rare, Dad,‘so-and-so’ just got booted for rape last week". Sure enough he then mentioned a student whom I had met (along with his father) this year on a visit to Exeter.
When the Globe piece came out, I asked my son about it. He obviously didn’t wish to discuss it much…though he did offer the statement " things are kinda sketchy at Exeter." That statement caught me totally off guard, and will require obvious follow-up! The ‘sexual harassment culture’, if there even is such an animal at PEA, is not necessarily my son’s largest concern as a PEA student. But, for what it’s worth, the issue of sexual harassment was a topic he brought up earlier in the year. On his own. In hindsight, he might have even done it more than once. Hindsight is 20-20, and now I suppose he was hoping to get a dialogue going, without wishing to seem like it was a big deal to him. I guess the academic onslaught kept it off my radar as a parent? I suppose it’s a conversation we need to have going forward.
One point I’d like to mention, from my perspective as a PEA parent as well as someone who works in a field where I am a Mandated Reporter of suspected abuse: The meeting with Reverend Thompson, the alleged perpetrator, and the victim created an imbalance of power. Thompson is a male, and a rather imposing figure at that. The acknowledged testimony from that meeting seems to support a contention that Thompson was sympathetic toward the alleged perpetrator, possibly from the start. His goal seems to have been to squelch the incident. His actions allow one to reach that assumption. That, if true, is criminal. The subsequent actions of the staff at PEA can be characterized similarly. In short, the ‘victim’ was victimized once again, for the good of the school’s reputation. That is extremely egregious and regrettable.Almost as regrettable as the aspersions cast upon the alleged victim…Center, your remarks seem out of line. You wrote, in a different thread:
“Such melodramatic self pity. I found the reference to her college plans a red flag. The boy was headed to Penn …he was lauded publicly. She wasn’t accepted anywhere she wanted to go to and was pissed .”
What the hell does any of that have to do with what took place in that church basement, which appears to be corroborated by the testimony of both parties present? Hopefully you don’t have a daughter or work in law enforcement, education, etc. I’m guessing you didn’t intend that to be worded in that manner?
Thanks for your post, Max #1675.
The actions as described fit the legal definition of assault. If you have any questions about this, imagine the same situation, but involving two men. [In the next instant, the victim slugs the perpetrator, 95 times out of 100.]
Staff members who cannot recognize assault should not be in charge of differentiating between sexual harassment and assault.
A further set of problems that I have with this is the statement by the staff member at Exeter that the “good news” was that this situation did not have to be reported to the police. For one thing, I am pretty sure that is erroneous. For a second, it would clearly be “good news” for the administration at Exeter that an assault did not need to be reported to the police–so the staffer may have been thinking from her own perspective, and not the student’s. For a third, it concerns me that it could actually be viewed as “good news” for the victim that she did not need to report the assault to the police, because of how people reporting assaults are treated, and the emotional challenges of a trial, if charges are brought.
I think it would help a great deal if the Ivy League colleges and other highly competitive colleges announced that they would no longer accept recommendations for students from any staff member who recommended a student who had committed simple assault (or worse), if this had not been mentioned in the letter, and the writer knew about it.
There are several cases now where men have been admitted to quite a few of the top schools, but to all appearances they lack the character that one would really like to see in people admitted “holistically.” On the one hand, I think that the admissions success of Owen Labrie and Brock Turner (and the young man in this case) indicate that admission staffers have no special insight into adolescent psychology. On the other hand, they can hardly be blamed if the people who know the applicants best withhold very relevant information.
I think, if there’s any doubt whatsoever, a school needs to report. If not to the police, to Child Protective Services (or whatever it’s called in your state). Let them decide whether it needs to be referred to the police, and then see where the chips fall. This is what any objective mandatory reporter would do.
I know a kid at a private school for kids with LDs and other social and emotional issues who did some really stupid ‘sexting’ after he’d turned 18 with another student who was under age. At the school’s request, the family discussed the incident with the boy’s therapist, who HAD to make that phone call, much to their surprise.
It all turned out fine, the younger kid’s family didn’t want to pursue anything (because he had a long history of engaging in precocious sexual behavior, which led to HIS being expelled from the school). But it was scary for both families, and I suppose it’s possible they’re not completely out of the woods yet, since it’s only been about nine months since the incident.
I think it’s pretty clear that Exeter was covering its own ass here and trying to protect a high-profile male student at the expense of a less “publicly lauded” young woman.
From my single encounter hearing the Reverend during experience Exeter you can tell the power this individual has on campus. They should have known better than to have him mediate the situation. I would like to think he was not assigned this duty and took it upon himself. He will likely be the sacrificial lamb in this mess. I also believe that regardless of the young girl’s motive, the boy admitted it happened. I know that @center believes this is simply sour grapes on the girl’s part; however, in this era of Title IX there is no such thing as “boys will be boys” (although of course it could apply to all gender options).
@Center perhaps she was “pissed” at what transpired in the church basement, something you appear to minimize and then intertwine with the boy’s acceptance to Penn. If his acceptance is jeopardized it is because of his own actions.
It truly is amazing how a young woman can be assaulted, have the boy admit to it in front of witnesses and then have some people turn the whole thing around and make it her issue. She is now ruining his life and the implication is she should simply have given him a “pass.” That very thinking is why sexual assault is such a tenacious problem - too many people just don’t take it seriously - “no harm, no foul” is basically the attitude.
The facts in this particular case are scarce and maybe more information will come out that will shed a different light on the matter. But right now with the information that we have I don’t see any “melodramatic self pity,” I see a girl who was willing to stand up for herself.