A male “transgender” teen has been convicted of sexually assaulting a girl in the girls’ restroom at a school in Loudoun County, Virginia, in a battle that has implicated the school board and superintendent in a coverup to promote their leftist agenda for students.
The Washington Examiner has documented that the teen, whose name was not released, was found guilty of sexually assaulting a ninth-grade girl in the women’s restroom at Stone Bridge High School.
The assault was by a male wearing a skirt, and the report revealed a juvenile court judge found evidence enough to convict, but the sentencing was postponed until the convict, now 15, is tried for a second assault.
Bill Stanley of the Stanley Law Group represented the victim and said in a statement, “We are relieved that justice was served today for the Smith’s daughter. This horrible incident has deeply affected the Smith family, and they are grateful for today’s outcome.”
It was Scott Smith, the victim’s father, who had been brutally taken down and arrested by law-enforcement officers summoned to a school board meeting in June.
The superintendent at the time was defending the district’s transgender policy that allowed the male wearing the skirt into the girls’ facility. He had denied knowing of the assault incident, although emails later undermined his claim.
The Examiner explained the assault against Smith’s daughter was reported on May 28, and the school told Smith officials would handle it internally. Smith summoned police for that attack, and he also is suing the district.
The case has become a flashpoint for parents all across the country because the National School Boards Association, citing the Loudoun County fiasco, had asked the Biden administration to treat parents protesting liberal school board agendas as domestic terrorists. Almost immediately, Biden’s attorney general, Merrick Garland, publicly sicced the Department of Justice and the FBI on those parents.
The NSBA later apologized for its attack on parents. But the fight has not diminished as parents across the country are objecting to liberal boards’ decisions to promote transgenderism, to teach children that all whites are racist through the Critical Race Theory agenda, and more.
It was the Daily Caller News Foundation that reported five former Virginia attorneys general want the state’s current legal officer, Mark Herring, to investigate the Loudoun County Public Schools board over its handling of the scandal.
Former AGs James S. Gilmore, III, Mark Earley, Sr., Jerry W. Kilgore, Robert F. McDonnell and Ken Cuccinelli, in a statement, called on Herring to open an investigation immediately.
“The Loudoun County School superintendent and the school board chose not to report two sexual assaults to parents,” the memorandum said. “With this failure, the school system places other girls at risk in Loudoun County and broke reporting regulations.”
The foundation report noted that parents and others have insisted Supt. Scott Ziegler and other school board members leave because of their behavior.
The former state officers say Virginia code provides that parents have a “fundamental right to make decisions concerning the upbringing, education, and care of the parent’s child.”
The board had claimed members didn’t know of the sexual assaults, but emails later confirmed Ziegler told them.
Also, WND has reported that a federal civil rights lawsuit has been filed against Garland for his recently announced policy that “effectively” criminalizes public criticism of local school boards by parents.
He’s accused of violating the First and Fifth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution.
The action was brought by the American Freedom Law Center in U.S. District Court in Washington on behalf of a group of parents from Saline, Michigan, and Loudoun County, Virginia.
AFLC Senior Counsel Robert Muise said, “The government is without authority to criminalize First Amendment activity that might cause another to feel ‘harassed’ or ‘intimidated,’ even if that is what the speaker intended, absent a showing that the speech itself falls within one of the very narrow, recognized exceptions, such as making a ‘true threat’ or engaging in ‘fighting words’ or ‘incitement’—which is not happening here.”
He continued, “First Amendment freedoms, such as those possessed by the objecting parents and private citizens, are protected not only against heavy-handed frontal attack, but also from being stifled by more subtle government interference. There is no question that the purpose and intended effect of the attorney general’s recent pronouncement is to silence dissenting opinions, in violation of the First Amendment.”
Garland’s recently announced “with some fanfare,” that he was ordering the FBI and federal prosecutors to use “the overwhelming power of the federal government’s criminal justice system to target those parents who dare to publicly criticize the local school boards that are indoctrinating their children with progressive claptrap,” the legal team explained.
Garland is accused of issuing a “direct threat” to parents and others that the DOJ and FBI are monitoring what is said at school board meetings, “thereby chilling such expression.”
Content created by the WND News Center is available for re-publication without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected].
This article was originally published by the WND News Center.