WARNING! This website presents distorted perspectives of ob

[Anonymous]

They're not.  The typical MO is to run in and post something witty like "Hyde is great" and leave.  Either that or they just dismiss anyone with a complaint about Hyde as being "angry" and "disgruntled".

[Anonymous]

They're not.  The typical MO is to run in and post something witty like "Hyde is great" and leave.  Either that or they just dismiss anyone with a complaint about Hyde as being "angry" and "disgruntled".

  Hey Hyde is great.  Don't listen to the angry disgruntled people that post here.

[Anonymous]

http://www.isaccorp.org/documentsam.asp#hyde

If you are truly interested, go to the above website and read the documents

A bunch of meaningless crap at the site you refer to. Unsubstantiated (and likely fabricated/exaggerated) claims and no legal finding. Again, anyone can make things up (and even believe them in their own mind), but proving it in a court is a whole 'nother ball game. Yes, the case was settled by Hyde to reduce their financial losses, at the advice of counsel. But the settling plaintiff party got money, not a legal finding (if in fact their charges were even true in the first place) and there is no determination as to what "really" happened. This individual is no longer in a position of authority over kids at Hyde and probably will never be. If this persone were a convicted pedophile, then they should absolutely be banned from the campus and be on a sex offender registry. But to continue persecuting him based on the he said/she said of a disturbed teenage girl and her even more disturbed parent just isn't right. If there are confirmed cases of his continued inappropriate behavior, then perhaps there's a matter to discuss. But there doesn't seem to be any smoke here (except from what you're smoking), let alone fire. Sorry, I don't agree with you or your practices here.

[Anonymous]

http://www.isaccorp.org/documentsam.asp#hyde

If you are truly interested, go to the above website and read the documents

A bunch of meaningless crap at the site you refer to. Unsubstantiated (and likely fabricated/exaggerated) claims and no legal finding. Again, anyone can make things up (and even believe them in their own mind), but proving it in a court is a whole 'nother ball game. Yes, the case was settled by Hyde to reduce their financial losses, at the advice of counsel. But the settling plaintiff party got money, not a legal finding (if in fact their charges were even true in the first place) and there is no determination as to what "really" happened. This individual is no longer in a position of authority over kids at Hyde and probably will never be. If this persone were a convicted pedophile, then they should absolutely be banned from the campus and be on a sex offender registry. But to continue persecuting him based on the he said/she said of a disturbed teenage girl and her even more disturbed parent just isn't right. If there are confirmed cases of his continued inappropriate behavior, then perhaps there's a matter to discuss. But there doesn't seem to be any smoke here (except from what you're smoking), let alone fire. Sorry, I don't agree with you or your practices here.

  Good points.  But don't you think it creates an appearance iimpropriety  to has Larry on campus?

On the other hand it, it is good that hyde is not tossing him as damaged goods and standing by him as part of the family, if he is in fact dealing with any alledged problems he may have had.

I think alot of the crap posted here on the subject is just that.  There are a group of folk with a "woodie" for Hyde and will grab anything that smells bad and say "see I told you Hyde was fucked up"

[Anonymous]

http://www.isaccorp.org/documentsam.asp#hyde

If you are truly interested, go to the above website and read the documents

A bunch of meaningless crap at the site you refer to. Unsubstantiated (and likely fabricated/exaggerated) claims and no legal finding. Again, anyone can make things up (and even believe them in their own mind), but proving it in a court is a whole 'nother ball game. Yes, the case was settled by Hyde to reduce their financial losses, at the advice of counsel. But the settling plaintiff party got money, not a legal finding (if in fact their charges were even true in the first place) and there is no determination as to what "really" happened. This individual is no longer in a position of authority over kids at Hyde and probably will never be. If this persone were a convicted pedophile, then they should absolutely be banned from the campus and be on a sex offender registry. But to continue persecuting him based on the he said/she said of a disturbed teenage girl and her even more disturbed parent just isn't right. If there are confirmed cases of his continued inappropriate behavior, then perhaps there's a matter to discuss. But there doesn't seem to be any smoke here (except from what you're smoking), let alone fire. Sorry, I don't agree with you or your practices here.

  Good points.  But don't you think it creates an appearance iimpropriety  to has Larry on campus?

On the other hand it, it is good that hyde is not tossing him as damaged goods and standing by him as part of the family, if he is in fact dealing with any alledged problems he may have had.

I think alot of the crap posted here on the subject is just that.  There are a group of folk with a "woodie" for Hyde and will grab anything that smells bad and say "see I told you Hyde was fucked up"

What evidence do you have that the student and parent are both "disturbed"?  Those are pretty strong claims.  Isn't it possible that they have legitimate complaints to make against Hyde?  I'm willing to believe that some Hyde critiques may exaggerate, but I know, based on what I've observed first hand, that some of the serious complaints against Hyde are absolutely valid.  They don't necessarily come via "disturbed" parents or students.

[Anonymous]

Oh, but it's so much easier to distract from the truth by going after the 'easy targets' (pissed off kids, parents).  That way they don't have to face up to what they've done.  They can just write off any criticism at all and stay in fantasyland.

[Anonymous]

http://www.isaccorp.org/documentsam.asp#hyde

If you are truly interested, go to the above website and read the documents

A bunch of meaningless crap at the site you refer to. Unsubstantiated (and likely fabricated/exaggerated) claims and no legal finding. Again, anyone can make things up (and even believe them in their own mind), but proving it in a court is a whole 'nother ball game. Yes, the case was settled by Hyde to reduce their financial losses, at the advice of counsel. But the settling plaintiff party got money, not a legal finding (if in fact their charges were even true in the first place) and there is no determination as to what "really" happened. This individual is no longer in a position of authority over kids at Hyde and probably will never be. If this persone were a convicted pedophile, then they should absolutely be banned from the campus and be on a sex offender registry. But to continue persecuting him based on the he said/she said of a disturbed teenage girl and her even more disturbed parent just isn't right. If there are confirmed cases of his continued inappropriate behavior, then perhaps there's a matter to discuss. But there doesn't seem to be any smoke here (except from what you're smoking), let alone fire. Sorry, I don't agree with you or your practices here.

  Good points.  But don't you think it creates an appearance iimpropriety  to has Larry on campus?

On the other hand it, it is good that hyde is not tossing him as damaged goods and standing by him as part of the family, if he is in fact dealing with any alledged problems he may have had.

I think alot of the crap posted here on the subject is just that.  There are a group of folk with a "woodie" for Hyde and will grab anything that smells bad and say "see I told you Hyde was fucked up"

How is it "likely fabricated, exaggerated?"  How do you have this first hand knowledge?  Please tell us!

[Anonymous]

How is it "likely fabricated, exaggerated?"  How do you have this first hand knowledge?  Please tell us!

[Anonymous]

How is it "likely fabricated, exaggerated?"  How do you have this first hand knowledge?  Please tell us!

If it were legit, ther would have been a police investigation and charges. Otherwise, not much there of substance to castrate someone for...

[Anonymous]

How is it "likely fabricated, exaggerated?"  How do you have this first hand knowledge?  Please tell us!

If it were legit, ther would have been a police investigation and charges. Otherwise, not much there of substance to castrate someone for...

Again you did not answer my question.  Where is your knowledge coming from?  How do you know there was not an investigation or charges?  Are you Larry Dubinsky?  If not, how do you know what happened?

[Anonymous]

How is it "likely fabricated, exaggerated?"  How do you have this first hand knowledge?  Please tell us!

If it were legit, ther would have been a police investigation and charges. Otherwise, not much there of substance to castrate someone for...

Again you did not answer my question.  Where is your knowledge coming from?  How do you know there was not an investigation or charges?  Are you Larry Dubinsky?  If not, how do you know what happened?

[Anonymous]

How is it "likely fabricated, exaggerated?"  How do you have this first hand knowledge?  Please tell us!

If it were legit, ther would have been a police investigation and charges. Otherwise, not much there of substance to castrate someone for...

Go castrate yourself.  If you have anything at all to do with the school you know he is a pervert in the worst way possible! Who cares who proves what, the guy is a sicko!!  Not rumor, fact.

[Anonymous]

 Not rumor, fact.

Let's hear your "facts", and not "She told me this...", or "I heard that...", or "So and so told me that he...". If you're going to destroy someone's reputation and forbid them from living with or visiting their family, you need a little more than opinions and heresay... enough that you affect their career and livelihood, maybe?

[Anonymous]

 Not rumor, fact.

Let's hear your "facts", and not "She told me this...", or "I heard that...", or "So and so told me that he...". If you're going to destroy someone's reputation and forbid them from living with or visiting their family, you need a little more than opinions and heresay... enough that you affect their career and livelihood, maybe?

You talk about destroying someone's reputation and affecting their livelihood and career.  Are you saying he should be allowed back to work at Hyde?  Should we give him a job coaching girls varsity again so he can give backrubs and cop a feel whenever he can?

What about destroying the reputation of the girl who you say fabricated this story? It is ok for you to attack someone, but not ok for someone on this board to make their own claims?  Please tell us if, and how you are related to the Hyde Schools?   I am not afraid to say that I am a former student and a friend of a couple of girls who made serious claims while I was at Hyde.  One student, (a boy) even confronted Larry in the auditorium in front of the entire school and said, "You make the girls here very uncomfortable and it needs to stop."  Hello???  Is this enough for you?  Why were these claims not made about other faculty?  Where there is smoke, there is fire.

[Anonymous]

 Not rumor, fact.

Let's hear your "facts", and not "She told me this...", or "I heard that...", or "So and so told me that he...". If you're going to destroy someone's reputation and forbid them from living with or visiting their family, you need a little more than opinions and heresay... enough that you affect their career and livelihood, maybe?

The FACT is that either he or the school settled a sexual harassment case against him.  Are they telling current and propective marks that this guy is frequently on campus?  Wouldn't you agree that those parents and kids at the very least have the right to know that?