Crime Teenager found guilty in Loudoun County bathroom assault - A day late and a dollar short

Article
Archive

The teenager accused of sexually assaulting a ninth-grade girl in a Loudoun County, Virginia, high school was found guilty on all charges.

The victim was assaulted in a women’s restroom at Stone Bridge High School by a male allegedly wearing a skirt. A judge found the evidence enough to convict but will hold on sentencing until the convicted teenager is tried for another alleged assault at a different high school.

“We are relieved that justice was served today for the Smith’s daughter,” Bill Stanley of the Stanley Law Group, who represented the victim, said in a statement. “This horrible incident has deeply affected the Smith family, and they are grateful for today’s outcome.”

The Loudoun County Sheriff's Department confirmed that the boy was charged with two counts of forcible sodomy.


Scott Smith, the victim’s father, was arrested at a school board meeting in June in which he got into an altercation with a woman who said that she didn’t believe his daughter was raped. The superintendent defended the school’s transgender bathroom policy at the meeting.

The assault against Smith’s daughter was reported on May 28, and the school told Smith they would handle it internally. He got police involved, but on Oct. 6 the same boy who was convicted of the May assault was charged with another assault at a different high school. The Smiths are suing the school district.

“The Smith family stands stronger than ever in moving forward to ensure that those responsible in the Loudoun County School system are held accountable, so that this may never happen again to anyone else’s child,” Stanley said.

The case has become a focus for a national debate over the rights of parents to exercise control over their children's education and school experience, from transgender bathroom policy, to masks, to critical race theory.

---

Better late than never, I guess. I just hope Smith doesn't drop his lawsuit. These fuckos need to be sued till they scream for mercy.

 

[From The Uncanny Valley]

I don't want this kind free to roam.

 

[Morethanabitfoolish]

A good start.

For people wound up by his demand for an apology and retraction firstly bear in mind that there's nothing that says the lawsuit is getting dropped if they do so. Secondly if they refuse to do so at this point it's potentially going to backfire on them down the line especially if then forced to as part of the settlement. There's no good look for them in refusing to apologise for the shit they've done but doing so also admits culpability.

Lastly there's a damn good reason to want NSBA to have to officially retract a request where they ask the government to treat parents like terrorists because NSBA is absolutely going to try that again and, more importantly at this point, that request has still been made. Two raped teenagers will not change that, if they have to retract it though that puts a crimp in those efforts and provides a fairly firm example going forwards for telling NSBA to eat shit with their demands in the future. When less than 3 months after calling someone a terrorist you have to turn around and admit in fact he was a suffering parent of a child raped on your watch in writing that sort of stain sticks.

 

[Kuchipatchi]

Chemically castrate the troon.

Or just outright castrate him. No rapist ever deserves their genitals.

The teenager accused of sexually assaulting a ninth-grade girl

The word you're looking for is RAPE. Stop using sexual assault instead, it makes it seem like the girl was just groped.

 

[Trianon]

Is there any proof that the kid was wearing a skirt? I believe all the other details, but the skirt is definitely a weird one and a little too perfect.

Apparently the dude himself confirmed that fact in court.

See this thread:

The girl and boy had had sex before, but he anal raped her against her will. Also good to know the girl testified against him, so people can stop acting like it's the dad's crusade.

 

[Cuckoman]

The girl and boy had had sex before

Has that been confirmed? And why is that relevant?
Or does it mean he raped her sometime before too, and she did not file charges then? So when he raped her the second time and she filed charges it is unfair?

Is the defence from him and all the troon advocates going to be :
Lets go back to 1940 where rape could by definition not occur between a married couple?
Is that the defence?

Cut off his balls and send him to big boys prison as a rapist.
Then go after the school board.

 

[Trianon]

Has that been confirmed? And why is that relevant?
Or does it mean he raped her sometime before too, and she did not file charges then? So when he raped her the second time and she filed charges it is unfair?

Is the defence from him and all the troon advocates going to be :
Lets go back to 1940 where rape could by definition not occur between a married couple?
Is that the defence?

Cut off his balls and send him to big boys prison as a rapist.
Then go after the school board.

Yes, it was confirmed in court today. It came up because the boy's defense was that they had previously met in the bathroom to have sex, and thus this time was consensual. Her argument was that she never consented to anal and was forced into it this time. I think the phrasing from the judge was "facts-sufficient that he did ... commit forcible sodomy and forcible fellatio by way of force, threat, or victim helplessness."

The case for the second assault will be heard later.

Speaking of the married couple thing, this is what RAINN has about Virginia's forcible sodomy laws:

Note: Where the offense is against a spouse, if deemed appropriate by the court, all or part of the sentence imposed may be suspended upon defendant’s completion of counseling or therapy.

What the hell.

The normal punishment is at least five years in prison, but that can go way, way up.

Edit: Here's a longer writeup.
https://archive.ph/Xycny

On Monday, the teenage victim of the Stone Bridge assault testified that she and her attacker had agreed to meet up in a school bathroom around 12:15 p.m. on the date of the assault. She testified they had not explicitly discussed having sex beforehand.
The teen testified she arrived first and chose to go in the girls’ bathroom because the two had always met in the girls’ bathrooms in the past. When the boy arrived, the teen testified, he came into the handicapped stall she was in and locked the door.
The two talked, before the girl testified the boy began grabbing her neck and other parts of her body in a sexual manner. She testified she told her attacker she was not in the mood for sex, but he forced himself on her.
“He flipped me over,” the girl testified. “I was on the ground and couldn’t move and he sexually assaulted me.”

The defendant initially told detectives the second sexual act did not occur, but later said it may have happened briefly and accidentally when a knee-length skirt he was wearing got caught on his watch as the pair were fumbling around in the bathroom stall.

Zweig said the boy repeatedly asked the girl to engage in a particular sex act [on Discord], but she rebuffed him each time. The day before the assault Zweig said the victim had been hospitalized because of a health condition that made her weak and the defendant “utilized her physical helplessness” to take advantage of her.

jail jail jail

 

[Unpaid Emotional Labourer]

I wonder how much of the troonosphere will fail their saving throw against resisting blaming the girl because she‘d fucked the tranny previously. Lol. Maybe they could share that Teen Vogue article about how girls shouldn’t be prudes about taking it up the ass, or mind that the accompanying illustration of their bodies labeled everything except the clit.

See, thing is, most rapes are not perpetrated by strangers. So, most tranny bathroom rapes, particularly in a school, are going to be by boys in dresses who are known to the girls. They’re not going to do it the first day they’re let in there. They’re going to wait for the girls to let their guard down, and then trap them.

 

[Feline Supremacist]

The defendant initially told detectives the second sexual act did not occur, but later said it may have happened briefly and accidentally when a knee-length skirt he was wearing got caught on his watch as the pair were fumbling around in the bathroom stall.

I don't think accidental surprise butt sex is a legit defense you retarded nigger.

 

[Trianon]

I don't think accidental surprise butt sex is a legit defense you exceptional nigger.

Love when my skirt gets caught on my watch and I commit a felony. Just girl things.

Also they weren't "fumbling around" together, he had already raped her at that point. Jesus.

 

[Iron Jaguar]

I hope Scott Smith gets awarded a billion dollars.

Does anyone know the ethnicity of the Troon, perchance?

 

[Feline Supremacist]

I hope Scott Smith gets awarded a billion dollars.

Does anyone know the ethnicity of the Troon, perchance?

Part of the 13%

 

[Astro Galactic Megalul]

Just has to be black at this point, considering we didn't get any information whatsoever about the perpetrator

 

[Malodorous Merkin]

Proofs it was a troon?!

How dare you ask that, bigot?!

The dress makes she a real girl, and your hate-filled denials of they's womanhood is literally violence.

 

[northstar747]

Part of the 13%

where was that stated? or are we guessing

 

[Feline Supremacist]

where was that stated? or are we guessing

Someone posted screencaps of students/parents posting about it, I don't remember which thread. There's no real confirmation though.

 

[Cool Username]

The best part of this whole saga will be when the judge sentences him to girls juvie.

Yes, I thought the same thing. I hope he doesn't end up with other girls, because that would be fucked up.

 

[DoomsdayElite]

Yes, I thought the same thing. I hope he doesn't end up with other girls, because that would be fucked up.

if that happens, I hope all the chicks gang up on the freak and tear him to pieces.

 

[kcbbq]

A good start.

For people wound up by his demand for an apology and retraction firstly bear in mind that there's nothing that says the lawsuit is getting dropped if they do so. Secondly if they refuse to do so at this point it's potentially going to backfire on them down the line especially if then forced to as part of the settlement. There's no good look for them in refusing to apologise for the shit they've done but doing so also admits culpability.

Lastly there's a damn good reason to want NSBA to have to officially retract a request where they ask the government to treat parents like terrorists because NSBA is absolutely going to try that again and, more importantly at this point, that request has still been made. Two raped teenagers will not change that, if they have to retract it though that puts a crimp in those efforts and provides a fairly firm example going forwards for telling NSBA to eat shit with their demands in the future. When less than 3 months after calling someone a terrorist you have to turn around and admit in fact he was a suffering parent of a child raped on your watch in writing that sort of stain sticks.

It's kind of important to the lawsuit to give the opportunity to publicly retract and apologize ahead of time. Civil lawsuits are for making the victim whole and a retraction does most of that, and not asking for it shows you aren't trying to be made whole.

The old way of doing it was dueling, where you also could get out of a duel by just apologizing ahead of time. It just moved into the courts when people got squeamish about homicide. Honor concepts were the same no matter the venue, even if we don't specifically think of it in those terms anymore.

 

[TowinKarz]

Any one notice how this article doesnt use "gender fluid" and correctly states its a male boy etc.

Now that he can't be protected, he's not one of the protected class, obviously.

The façade of invulnerability must remain, so, anyone successfully struck through that shield was, obviously, never a TRUE and HONEST protected.

 

[Iron Hamster]

Has that been confirmed? And why is that relevant?

Hasn't it been argued that consent can be rescinded? (not implying that is the case here. Just in general)