Scary Larry back on campus!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Anonymous]

Emil, you are so right-on! when you say

Those in public life know that is the higher standard that you must uphold. IF you hold your self as a moral beacon, a "City on a Hill" if you will, as has hyde, it must not only refrain from impropriety it must refrain from the apperance of impropriety.

but this is really the most benign position that Hyde could morally defend itself on.  And it hasn't, and doesn't.  It has abdicated all responsibility for the sake of expediency, as you say.  Actually, expediency - in itself - is probably the nicest way to interpret it.  I might go further...

I might also add that your perspective, which I truly do value, is giving LD a bit too much the benefit of the doubt.  He was kind of wormy even when he was at Bath, albeit a smaller, skinnier one.

Totally respect your posts Emil, but have to admit that I too got a little rattled when you said you would give LD the benefit of the doubt.  There was a whole lot of stuff going on with LD for many years which even the school admitted to. It was one of the teachers who prodded the girl to come forward so they could finally put an end to all his perverted B.S. Hyde never said the incident didn't happen but they were saying they took the appropriate action in a timely manner.  Take it or leave it, but I do have some inside info about this and know that LD was really bringing the school down with his perverted ways.

   If the case is "There was a whole lot of stuff going on with LD for many years which even the school admitted to"  having him in on campus housing is not a good idea.  My wife deals with sexual offenders as a social worker.  Recidivism is very high even in our state which has a model program.  She never argues with me when I assert that those that prey on the young should be brought 'round back of the milk shed and shot. My feeling on this are a dark spot of conservatism on my other wise sunny liberal demeanor.
 IF what you are saying is true, LD should be no where near teenage girls.  Having some one like that on a campus with underage girls is like having a recovering alcoholic as a bartender.  This just makes no sense from so many angles,  Maybe if hyde passes what ever they are smoking to me I might be able to see thier POV.

[Anonymous]

google 'hyde school + abuse' and it comes up at the bottom of page 1.

whatever happened to all those negative reviews from unhappy parents that were submitted to amazon.com (the Gauld books)?  they aren't there anymore?  did someone pressure amazon to pull them?

They are stil on Amazon.com.  Here is one of the most recent

Reviewer: Bonnie Height "NEbooklover" - See all my reviews
While this book does provide sound principles for developing a youngster's character, in practice, the Hyde experience does not play out as described. The principles in the book when put into practice at the school create a punitive environment for not just the students but the parents. Never have I felt my privacy or that of my family so invaded. I pulled my child out of Hyde after only one semester, as the cult atmosphere and the requirement that everyone fall in line without question reminded me of a similar experience I had years back with the "Landmark Forum" or EST, where you are made to feel that everything you've done up until now is just plain wrong. My child did much better away from Hyde and has gone on to be a successful adult. When we withdrew, we were told our child could never come back to visit Hyde friends. The realities of Hyde School seriously undermine some of the good information in the book. Read the book if you must, but run from the school.

[Anonymous]

google 'hyde school + abuse' and it comes up at the bottom of page 1.

whatever happened to all those negative reviews from unhappy parents that were submitted to amazon.com (the Gauld books)?  they aren't there anymore?  did someone pressure amazon to pull them?

They are stil on Amazon.com.  Here is one of the most recent

Reviewer: Bonnie Height "NEbooklover" - See all my reviews
While this book does provide sound principles for developing a youngster's character, in practice, the Hyde experience does not play out as described. The principles in the book when put into practice at the school create a punitive environment for not just the students but the parents. Never have I felt my privacy or that of my family so invaded. I pulled my child out of Hyde after only one semester, as the cult atmosphere and the requirement that everyone fall in line without question reminded me of a similar experience I had years back with the "Landmark Forum" or EST, where you are made to feel that everything you've done up until now is just plain wrong. My child did much better away from Hyde and has gone on to be a successful adult. When we withdrew, we were told our child could never come back to visit Hyde friends. The realities of Hyde School seriously undermine some of the good information in the book. Read the book if you must, but run from the school.

You can find other critical reviews of the Gauld book about Hyde at:
http://www.amazon.com/Character-First-H ... F8&s=books

[Anonymous]

Emil, you are so right-on! when you say

Those in public life know that is the higher standard that you must uphold. IF you hold your self as a moral beacon, a "City on a Hill" if you will, as has hyde, it must not only refrain from impropriety it must refrain from the apperance of impropriety.

but this is really the most benign position that Hyde could morally defend itself on.  And it hasn't, and doesn't.  It has abdicated all responsibility for the sake of expediency, as you say.  Actually, expediency - in itself - is probably the nicest way to interpret it.  I might go further...

I might also add that your perspective, which I truly do value, is giving LD a bit too much the benefit of the doubt.  He was kind of wormy even when he was at Bath, albeit a smaller, skinnier one.

Totally respect your posts Emil, but have to admit that I too got a little rattled when you said you would give LD the benefit of the doubt.  There was a whole lot of stuff going on with LD for many years which even the school admitted to. It was one of the teachers who prodded the girl to come forward so they could finally put an end to all his perverted B.S. Hyde never said the incident didn't happen but they were saying they took the appropriate action in a timely manner.  Take it or leave it, but I do have some inside info about this and know that LD was really bringing the school down with his perverted ways.

   If the case is "There was a whole lot of stuff going on with LD for many years which even the school admitted to"  having him in on campus housing is not a good idea.  My wife deals with sexual offenders as a social worker.  Recidivism is very high even in our state which has a model program.  She never argues with me when I assert that those that prey on the young should be brought 'round back of the milk shed and shot. My feeling on this are a dark spot of conservatism on my other wise sunny liberal demeanor.
 IF what you are saying is true, LD should be no where near teenage girls.  Having some one like that on a campus with underage girls is like having a recovering alcoholic as a bartender.  This just makes no sense from so many angles,  Maybe if hyde passes what ever they are smoking to me I might be able to see thier POV.

I ditto this!  How stupid is Hyde by profiling in their hewsletter someone who was fired for inappropriate behavior against female students?  Are they nuts?  Could not believe when I checked it out and saw that they profiled the remarriage of Larry and Donna and worse than that they married at the Hyde Bath Campus.  This shows the true picture of the arrogance of Hyde.  They should run from any association with LD and instead they embrace him.  I would never send my child to this school until the current board is gone.

[Anonymous]

Because they see themselves as "the city on top of the hill" (debatable perception, I might add), they should not be held to the same standards of protocol and decency, not to mention the law?  "Arrogance" is the most diluted way to spell it!

[Anonymous]

Emil, you are so right-on! when you say

Those in public life know that is the higher standard that you must uphold. IF you hold your self as a moral beacon, a "City on a Hill" if you will, as has hyde, it must not only refrain from impropriety it must refrain from the apperance of impropriety.

but this is really the most benign position that Hyde could morally defend itself on.  And it hasn't, and doesn't.  It has abdicated all responsibility for the sake of expediency, as you say.  Actually, expediency - in itself - is probably the nicest way to interpret it.  I might go further...

I might also add that your perspective, which I truly do value, is giving LD a bit too much the benefit of the doubt.  He was kind of wormy even when he was at Bath, albeit a smaller, skinnier one.

"Wormy" thats an understatement. I would avoid going outside b/c I knew he would be lurching around trying to talk to any cute girl that was around. In the summer time he would always ask the girls to come to his house and go swimming in his filthy pool. Might I add his house was grimy as hell. The place was absolutely disgusting and I would shower everytime I had been over there.

Instead of Hyde trying to help this very sick man, all they are doing is enabling him and putting themselves in danger of future law suits. Such idiots.......thats all I can say. They really should move the school to Park City, Utah. They would fit right in. They're already are all married to eachother.

[Anonymous]

:rofl:  :rofl:  :rofl:  :rofl:  ::puke::

[Anonymous]

Emil, you are so right-on! when you say

Those in public life know that is the higher standard that you must uphold. IF you hold your self as a moral beacon, a "City on a Hill" if you will, as has hyde, it must not only refrain from impropriety it must refrain from the apperance of impropriety.

but this is really the most benign position that Hyde could morally defend itself on.  And it hasn't, and doesn't.  It has abdicated all responsibility for the sake of expediency, as you say.  Actually, expediency - in itself - is probably the nicest way to interpret it.  I might go further...

I might also add that your perspective, which I truly do value, is giving LD a bit too much the benefit of the doubt.  He was kind of wormy even when he was at Bath, albeit a smaller, skinnier one.

"Wormy" thats an understatement. I would avoid going outside b/c I knew he would be lurching around trying to talk to any cute girl that was around. In the summer time he would always ask the girls to come to his house and go swimming in his filthy pool. Might I add his house was grimy as hell. The place was absolutely disgusting and I would shower everytime I had been over there.

Instead of Hyde trying to help this very sick man, all they are doing is enabling him and putting themselves in danger of future law suits. Such idiots.......thats all I can say. They really should move the school to Park City, Utah. They would fit right in. They're already are all married to eachother.

Was the school aware of how he was with the girls?  You were obviously a student there.  Can you tell us whether he was ever reported to the staff and what kind of action they took against him?  Is it true that he was school chum of Malcolm Gauld?  I am wondering if this played a role in Hyde not doing anything about him all those years.

[Anonymous]

I wonder what LD's wife thinks of all this.  She must have had an inkling previous, hence (along with other factors, I'm sure) the divorce...  But still... I guess being made head of the History Dept. along with the Technology Dept. must fulfill certain needs...

[Anonymous]

I wonder what LD's wife thinks of all this.  She must have had an inkling previous, hence (along with other factors, I'm sure) the divorce...  But still... I guess being made head of the History Dept. along with the Technology Dept. must fulfill certain needs...

Mrs. LD  was often present as he would massage my shoulders in Yearbook class.  She also had no issues with his offer for me to sit on his lap in a crowded car.  I"m often curious how he interacts with his daughters...

[Anonymous]

Emil, you are so right-on! when you say

Those in public life know that is the higher standard that you must uphold. IF you hold your self as a moral beacon, a "City on a Hill" if you will, as has hyde, it must not only refrain from impropriety it must refrain from the apperance of impropriety.

but this is really the most benign position that Hyde could morally defend itself on.  And it hasn't, and doesn't.  It has abdicated all responsibility for the sake of expediency, as you say.  Actually, expediency - in itself - is probably the nicest way to interpret it.  I might go further...

I might also add that your perspective, which I truly do value, is giving LD a bit too much the benefit of the doubt.  He was kind of wormy even when he was at Bath, albeit a smaller, skinnier one.

"Wormy" thats an understatement. I would avoid going outside b/c I knew he would be lurching around trying to talk to any cute girl that was around. In the summer time he would always ask the girls to come to his house and go swimming in his filthy pool. Might I add his house was grimy as hell. The place was absolutely disgusting and I would shower everytime I had been over there.

Instead of Hyde trying to help this very sick man, all they are doing is enabling him and putting themselves in danger of future law suits. Such idiots.......thats all I can say. They really should move the school to Park City, Utah. They would fit right in. They're already are all married to eachother.

Was the school aware of how he was with the girls?  You were obviously a student there.  Can you tell us whether he was ever reported to the staff and what kind of action they took against him?  Is it true that he was school chum of Malcolm Gauld?  I am wondering if this played a role in Hyde not doing anything about him all those years.

YES, he is a good friend of Malcolm and Ken Grant as well as a VERY close friend of Pam Bertchy.  And yes, the school was aware of it.  We all talked about it all the time and the staff even got sick of his perverted ways.  One student stood up in front of staff, administration and students and announced that LD made all the girls feel uncomfortable.  One of you asked why the school did nothing until a parent finally went to court.  Answer is, I don't know.  I suppose it is their arrogance and protecting their own

[Anonymous]

Emil, you are so right-on! when you say

Those in public life know that is the higher standard that you must uphold. IF you hold your self as a moral beacon, a "City on a Hill" if you will, as has hyde, it must not only refrain from impropriety it must refrain from the apperance of impropriety.

but this is really the most benign position that Hyde could morally defend itself on.  And it hasn't, and doesn't.  It has abdicated all responsibility for the sake of expediency, as you say.  Actually, expediency - in itself - is probably the nicest way to interpret it.  I might go further...

I might also add that your perspective, which I truly do value, is giving LD a bit too much the benefit of the doubt.  He was kind of wormy even when he was at Bath, albeit a smaller, skinnier one.

"Wormy" thats an understatement. I would avoid going outside b/c I knew he would be lurching around trying to talk to any cute girl that was around. In the summer time he would always ask the girls to come to his house and go swimming in his filthy pool. Might I add his house was grimy as hell. The place was absolutely disgusting and I would shower everytime I had been over there.

Instead of Hyde trying to help this very sick man, all they are doing is enabling him and putting themselves in danger of future law suits. Such idiots.......thats all I can say. They really should move the school to Park City, Utah. They would fit right in. They're already are all married to eachother.

Was the school aware of how he was with the girls?  You were obviously a student there.  Can you tell us whether he was ever reported to the staff and what kind of action they took against him?  Is it true that he was school chum of Malcolm Gauld?  I am wondering if this played a role in Hyde not doing anything about him all those years.

YES, he is a good friend of Malcolm and Ken Grant as well as a VERY close friend of Pam Bertchy.  And yes, the school was aware of it.  We all talked about it all the time and the staff even got sick of his perverted ways.  One student stood up in front of staff, administration and students and announced that LD made all the girls feel uncomfortable.  One of you asked why the school did nothing until a parent finally went to court.  Answer is, I don't know.  I suppose it is their arrogance and protecting their own

   I find it disturbing, not that people like him, because he probably is a likable guy ( if you were a guy and not a teenage girl), not that when it was brought to light that Hyde defended itself because that is just common sense, not that the community wants to help him because to not help some one they have made co dependant would be immoral.  The thing that is disturbing is that Hyde has not figured out a way to do this at arms length, as the lawyers say.  It is either stupid or arrogant, perhaps both.

[Anonymous]

I find it disturbing, not that people like him, because he probably is a likable guy ( if you were a guy and not a teenage girl), not that when it was brought to light that Hyde defended itself because that is just common sense, not that the community wants to help him because to not help some one they have made co dependant would be immoral.  The thing that is disturbing is that Hyde has not figured out a way to do this at arms length, as the lawyers say.  It is either stupid or arrogant, perhaps both.[/quote]

But weighted toward stupidity. Joe Gauld et al. seek to replace intellectual education by moral education. The whole point of the scathing denunciation of them here is that they are not true to the religion they profess and their own better knowledge.

[Anonymous]

I find it disturbing, not that people like him, because he probably is a likable guy ( if you were a guy and not a teenage girl), not that when it was brought to light that Hyde defended itself because that is just common sense, not that the community wants to help him because to not help some one they have made co dependant would be immoral.  The thing that is disturbing is that Hyde has not figured out a way to do this at arms length, as the lawyers say.  It is either stupid or arrogant, perhaps both.

But weighted toward stupidity. Joe Gauld et al. seek to replace intellectual education by moral education. The whole point of the scathing denunciation of them here is that they are not true to the religion they profess and their own better knowledge.[/quote]

The best part of this fellow posters is that LD still comes on campus and still harasses the girls.  Because I am not there I do not have all the details, but was told this year there were more complaints about him and once again Hyde was warned, but nothing done.  It is disturbing that Hyde cares so little about the female students and what this might do to them psychologically.  Could it be that they are a bunch of male chauvenist pigs who don't take things like this seriously?

 You are right. This school is suppose to teach about morale and character and here they are not giving a damn about those things. I remember the headmaster would not listen to a bunch of us when we confronted him about the way they handled the whole LD thing. It was at that moment that I realized I had to simply keep my mouth shut and get through that year as best I could and then distance myself from that school forever.

Gary, you have more courage than anyone I know.  Ironically you are a great example of a Hyde graduate.  Someone who speaks up and speaks out and is not afraid to confront. Everything they probably hate about you now is what they have been teaching for years, ha!!!!!

[Anonymous]

I find it disturbing, not that people like him, because he probably is a likable guy ( if you were a guy and not a teenage girl), not that when it was brought to light that Hyde defended itself because that is just common sense, not that the community wants to help him because to not help some one they have made co dependant would be immoral.  The thing that is disturbing is that Hyde has not figured out a way to do this at arms length, as the lawyers say.  It is either stupid or arrogant, perhaps both.

But weighted toward stupidity. Joe Gauld et al. seek to replace intellectual education by moral education. The whole point of the scathing denunciation of them here is that they are not true to the religion they profess and their own better knowledge.

The best part of this fellow posters is that LD still comes on campus and still harasses the girls.  Because I am not there I do not have all the details, but was told this year there were more complaints about him and once again Hyde was warned, but nothing done.  It is disturbing that Hyde cares so little about the female students and what this might do to them psychologically.  Could it be that they are a bunch of male chauvenist pigs who don't take things like this seriously?

 You are right. This school is suppose to teach about morale and character and here they are not giving a damn about those things. I remember the headmaster would not listen to a bunch of us when we confronted him about the way they handled the whole LD thing. It was at that moment that I realized I had to simply keep my mouth shut and get through that year as best I could and then distance myself from that school forever.

Gary, you have more courage than anyone I know.  Ironically you are a great example of a Hyde graduate.  Someone who speaks up and speaks out and is not afraid to confront. Everything they probably hate about you now is what they have been teaching for years, ha!!!!![/quote]

One minute! It's true that I'm a Hyde graduate, but my name is not Gary; it's Mike. I'll thank you just the same though.