Author Topic: Hyde  (Read 10321 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164659
  • Karma: +3/-3
    • View Profile
Hyde
« Reply #45 on: November 02, 2007, 09:07:30 AM »
Out of curiousity, and you may have discussed it already I'm just to lazy to check, but in what other ways does the hyde school monitor communications?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Ursus

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 8989
  • Karma: +2/-0
    • View Profile
Hyde
« Reply #46 on: November 02, 2007, 10:13:18 AM »
Quote from: ""The Gookin""
Out of curiousity, and you may have discussed it already I'm just to lazy to check, but in what other ways does the hyde school monitor communications?


This may be an incomplete answer, but here goes.  Phone communications are effectively not private.  Cell phones are not allowed (for students).  Pay phones that one can use for communicating with the outside world are all located in hallways and/or very public places.  The pay phones are the ones your parents would call you up on, if they wanted to talk with you.  I don't know what the restrictions are regarding phone communication if you are "in trouble" there, but I imagine there would be some.

The chances of you being in such a spot with no one around or in within earshot are virtually nil, since students' time is pretty highly organized.  You are always around someone else at any given time of day.  An exception might be if you chose to go on a 5 mile run alone in the woods or along the streets at 5 or 6 AM.  Maybe on a weekend you could go into town alone.  But if you were "in trouble" those off-campus privileges would be denied you.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
-------------- -------------- --------------

Offline Ursus

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 8989
  • Karma: +2/-0
    • View Profile
Hyde
« Reply #47 on: November 02, 2007, 12:49:34 PM »
I think one of the more egregious areas of abuse that Hyde is guilty of is in the arena of sexual predation of the student body.  I imagine some parents might think something along the lines of, "What's the harm of a little brainwashing, if it gets my kid back on track?"  Certainly I have read words to that effect elsewhere, when it comes to parents rationalizing sending their kid away some where.  Said parents and I might differ as to the consequences of a "little brainwashing," but I doubt very much that we would disagree on the potentially lifelong effects of a student being raped, seduced, or sexually assaulted by a faculty member.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
-------------- -------------- --------------

Offline Che Gookin

  • Global Moderator
  • Newbie
  • *****
  • Posts: 4241
  • Karma: +11/-3
    • View Profile
Hyde
« Reply #48 on: November 03, 2007, 03:38:35 AM »
Quote from: ""Ursus""
I think one of the more egregious areas of abuse that Hyde is guilty of is in the arena of sexual predation of the student body.  I imagine some parents might think something along the lines of, "What's the harm of a little brainwashing, if it gets my kid back on track?"  Certainly I have read words to that effect elsewhere, when it comes to parents rationalizing sending their kid away some where.  Said parents and I might differ as to the consequences of a "little brainwashing," but I doubt very much that we would disagree on the potentially lifelong effects of a student being raped, seduced, or sexually assaulted by a faculty member.


Explain this statement a little more please...
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Ursus

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 8989
  • Karma: +2/-0
    • View Profile
Hyde
« Reply #49 on: November 05, 2007, 12:45:55 AM »
Hmmm.  Where to start?  It might be easiest to just start with a case that has received a lot of coverage this year, that would be the Larry Dubinsky case.  This thread in the Hyde forum has discussed this at some length, along with a number of other cases:
    Scary Larry back on campus!!!!!!!!!!!!
http://wwf.fornits.com/viewtopic.php?t=15689[/list]Briefly, Larry Dubinsky was a student during the mid/late 1970s, apparently a seemingly successful one, as he was a member of the Senior Leadership during his final year.  He married another Hyde student, Donna Leonard, who was a few years younger.  The Dubinskys came back to teach at Hyde, specifically the Woodstock campus.  This was sometime in the mid or late 1990s; I'm not sure as to the specific year.  Larry liked to express his love for the girls in rather... physical ways... There were complaints.  Hyde did nothing.  Eventually, a parent sued Hyde for the sexual assault of their daughter. This latest development was relatively recent, I'm thinking maybe 5 years ago.  Here are links to some pages from the lawsuit, filed on the ISACCorp website:
http://www.isaccorp.org/hyde/hydelawsuit01.jpg
http://www.isaccorp.org/hyde/hydelawsuit02.jpg
http://www.isaccorp.org/hyde/hydelawsuit03.jpg
http://www.isaccorp.org/hyde/hydelawsuit04.jpg[/list]These are jpg scans of actual documents, with the names of the student and her family blacked out, and are a bit fuzzy and not especially easy to read.  I will transcribe them and post them here when I have more time.
« Last Edit: November 06, 2007, 09:59:56 AM by Guest »
-------------- -------------- --------------

Offline Ursus

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 8989
  • Karma: +2/-0
    • View Profile
Hyde
« Reply #50 on: November 05, 2007, 03:25:27 AM »
Transcription of the ISACCorp document (original on 4 separate pages) on the Dubinsky case.  Please see my previous post for the links to jpg scans of the actual documents.
===========================================

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT

XXXX XXXX VS. HYDE SCHOOL AT WOODSTOCK
CIVIL ACTION NO.
MARCH 5, 2002

C O M P L A I N T

1.  This is an action by a female student against a private school which, upon information and belief, is the recipient of federal funds, for tolerating and encouraging a pattern of sexual misconduct directed against her and other female students by a male faulty member, over a long period of time.

2.  Jurisdiction of this court is invoked under the provisions of Sections 1331, 1343(3) and 1367(a) of Title 28 of the United States Code and this court's supplementary and diversity jurisdiction over the plaintiff's causes of action under state law.

3.  The plaintiff is an adult female citizen of the State of XXXXX.  She was born on XXX and at all times mentioned herein was an out-of-state student at the defendant's school in Woodstock, Connecticut.

4.  The defendant is a private school located in Woodstock, Connecticut.  Upon information and belief, the defendant receives federal financial assistance for the operation of its educational and related programs.

5.  The amount at issue in this case is greater than seventy-five thousand dollars, exclusive of interest and costs.

6.  In 2001, and for several years prior thereto, the defendant employed at its school in Woodstock an adult male teacher by the name of Larry Dubinsky.  At all times mentioned herein, said Dubinsky was acting as the agent, servant, and employee of the defendant, within the scope of his employment and agency, and for the defendant's financial benefit.

7.  For several years prior to and including the events described hereinafter, the defendant, through its administrators and officials, had actual knowledge that Dubinsky  was subjecting the female students at Hyde School to sexual harassment which included inappropriate touching, staring, and comments.  Despite such actual knowledge, the defendant retained Dubinsky on its faculty and permitted him to continue to have daily, direct and unsupervised contact with the adolescent female students at the school, including the plaintiff.

8.  During the second week of July, 2001, at the school, Dubinsky initiated a "role-playing" incident with the plaintiff in the course of which he insisted upon having full body contact with the plaintiff, repeatedly and over her objection, while making lewd and inappropriate comments to her which included the phrase "fucking pussy".

9.  On August 1, 2001, while instructing a dance routine in which the plaintiff was involved, Dubinsky required the plaintiff to be his partner and to dance with him.  He required her to bend down in front of him, then lifted her, raised her blouse, felt around her body for her hips and placed his hands on her hips.  When the plaintiff objected and moved away from him, he attempted to coerce her into continuing.

10.  When the plaintiff complained to the defendants administrators about the aforesaid misconduct, she was summoned to a meeting at which she was required to meet with Dubinsky and was criticized by administrators for not wanting to look at Dubinsky during the meeting.  The following day, she was summoned to yet another meeting with administrators, which the administrators concealed from her parents.  When school officials were informed in September of 2001 that the plaintiff was suffering from recurring nightmares regarding Dubinsky, a faculty member falsely accused the plaintiff of flirting with another male teacher.  Her mother's pleas to the defendant's highest administrators that Dubinsky be kept away from the plaintiff and not allowed on school grounds were rejected.  In February of 2002, the plaintiff was required to serve as a waitress at a party given the defendant's headmaster at which other under-age students were required to serve alcoholic beverages.  Dubinsky was an invited guest at that party.

11.  In the manner described above, the defendant has, on the basis of the plaintiff's sex, excluded her from participation in, denied her the benefits of, and/or subjected her to discrimination under an education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance in violation of Title IX of the Educational Amendments of 1972, Sections 1681 - 1688 of Title 20 of the United States Code.

12.  In the manner described above, the defendant through its aforesaid agent subjected the plaintiff to assault and battery on each of the two separate occasions described above, in violation of Connecticut state law.

13.  The conduct of the defendant and its agent described above was extreme and outrageous and was carried out with the knowledge that it probably would cause the plaintiff to suffer emotional distress.

14.  In the manner described above, the defendant further acted in negligent disregard  of the probability that its conduct would cause the plaintiff, like any person of ordinary sensibilities similarly situated, to suffer emotional distress so severe that physical illness could result.

15.  As a direct and proximate result of the acts and omissions of the defendant described above, the plaintiff has suffered severe emotional distress.

WHEREFORE, the plaintiff claims judgment against the defendant for compensatory damages, punitive damages, attorney fees and costs.

CLAIM FOR JURY TRIAL
The plaintiff claims trial by jury.

THE PLAINTIFF

BY:______________
JOHN R. WILLIAMS
Federal Bar No. ct00215
Williams and Pattis, LLC
51 Elm Street
New Haven, CT 06510
TELEPHONE:  203.562.9931
FAX: 203.776.9494
E-MAIL:  [email protected]
Her Attorney
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
-------------- -------------- --------------

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164659
  • Karma: +3/-3
    • View Profile
Hyde
« Reply #51 on: November 05, 2007, 11:18:28 AM »
This makes me a bit ill thinking about all that must have gone on that didn't even make it to the official complaint.  The pain of having to deal with a punitive and hostile administration, not to metnion the false innuendo used to possibly discredit this poor girl's pov when keeping it under wraps was no longer a possibility, reminds me so much of the hyde I once knew.

I guess not much has changed.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Ursus

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 8989
  • Karma: +2/-0
    • View Profile
Hyde
« Reply #52 on: November 05, 2007, 10:03:10 PM »
Despite everything that transpired, despite the lawsuit even, Hyde continued to keep Dubinsky on campus.  I believe that he lost his teaching benefits, but the rationalization for keeping him there was alleged to reside in the fact that his wife still taught there, and that they had kids which were still attending at the time.

Not sure how the needs or safety of the other female students attending at the time were factored into that, but I think it does say something about where Hyde places their priorities and exactly what kind of values they actually do hold dearest.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
-------------- -------------- --------------

Offline Anonymous

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 164659
  • Karma: +3/-3
    • View Profile
Hyde
« Reply #53 on: November 05, 2007, 11:00:58 PM »
It definitely shows a clear lack of regard for the safety of the students by keeping the man on the campus.

He should have been removed and kept away dependent upon the outcome of the court's decision.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Ursus

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 8989
  • Karma: +2/-0
    • View Profile
Hyde
« Reply #54 on: November 06, 2007, 08:12:38 AM »
The family chose to settle out of court, probably out of consideration for the daughter, and for what she undoubtedly would be put through during the trial.  They were assured that "Hyde had learned its lesson."  

I think each time such a circumstance arises, the family and the courts are given the impression that these are highly unusual circumstances, and that such a situation could never arise again.  Families, or specific members of families, are often portrayed as crazy, having irrational vendettas, or in need of psychological help.  The existence of former lawsuits is always downplayed or denied.  In Connecticut, the obfuscation was enhanced by the relatively recent establishment of Hyde's Woodstock campus.  Information or awareness of cases involving the Bath campus were less accessible.
 
In truth, such situations have been arising since at least the mid 1970s.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
-------------- -------------- --------------

Offline Ursus

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 8989
  • Karma: +2/-0
    • View Profile
Hyde
« Reply #55 on: November 07, 2007, 10:22:23 AM »
Anyway, back to Larry Dubinsky... In some respects, Dubinsky never really left the Hyde enclave.  His teaching activities were curtailed, as mentioned previously, and Hyde did eventually see fit to move the family "off-campus" (within a short walking distance), and somewhere in there the Dubinskys got divorced over the whole scandal.  However, within a short period of time, Larry and Donna remarried.  The event took place on the Bath campus in the Hyde "mansion" with many from Hyde community attending, it was even duly discussed in a Feature in one of the Hyde newsletters.

Larry was frequently sighted on campus, presumably due to "family activities," and there were several rumors as to his involvement with one or some of the sports teams as recently as 2006.  I am not sure that that involvement was considered "official employment;" he may well have been "volunteering" as a local parent.  He continued to participate in school functions, alumni reunions, etc. essentially all activities and avenues normally open to an alumnus, parent, or spouse of a faculty member since he was, in fact, a member of all three.

Here are some quotes from posts on the Hyde forum relative to this time:
    http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?t=15689&start=87[/url][/list]
      http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?t=15689&start=98[/url][/list]
        http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?t=15689&start=108[/url][/list]
          http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?t=15689&start=115[/url][/list]
            http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?t=15689&start=122[/url][/list]
              http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?t=15689&start=124[/url][/list]
                http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?t=15689&start=131[/url][/list]
                  http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?t=15689&start=155[/url][/list]
                  « Last Edit: November 25, 2007, 05:23:38 PM by Guest »
                  -------------- -------------- --------------

                  Offline hurrikayne

                  • Newbie
                  • *
                  • Posts: 373
                  • Karma: +0/-0
                    • View Profile
                  Your experience
                  « Reply #56 on: November 09, 2007, 12:33:08 AM »
                  Oh my Gawd.  I thought I had things bad (oh, and I did...just see anything whatsoever to do with Roloff's...).  You folks seriously went through some shit too.  I really believed that no one else had been through similar crap.  That's such a shallow and whiny point of view, surprisingly.  Never thought of myself as shallow & whiny before...
                  « Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
                  "Motivation is everything. You can do the work of two people, but you can\'t be two people. Instead, you have to inspire the next guy down the line and get him to inspire his people. " - Lee Iacocca

                  Offline Ursus

                  • Newbie
                  • *
                  • Posts: 8989
                  • Karma: +2/-0
                    • View Profile
                  Hyde
                  « Reply #57 on: November 09, 2007, 08:13:11 AM »
                  There are definite similarities.  One of the reasons these ideologically-driven programs last so long is they tie in their raison d'etre with lots of so-called virtues and laudable values.

                  I love this statement from the Roloff threads.  Kind of sums up their rationalizations real nice.  It could have just as easily been written by a Hyde-apologist.
                    Quote from: ""Guest""
                    In the final analysis, if we want civilization to advance and the world to become a better place, we need rules and role models that can counteract dissolution and evil-doing. Human behavior is a broad spectrum, and even religions and cults have helped with those things.
                    http://fornits.com/wwf/viewtopic.php?t=19224&start=4[/list]
                    « Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
                    -------------- -------------- --------------

                    Offline Ursus

                    • Newbie
                    • *
                    • Posts: 8989
                    • Karma: +2/-0
                      • View Profile
                    Hyde
                    « Reply #58 on: November 25, 2007, 05:12:27 PM »
                    And if Larry Dubinsky's shenanigans -- in and of themselves -- weren't bad enough, the icing on the cake was how Hyde chose to deal with them.  At no time were any authorities contacted.  In fact, Hyde held at least two meetings with the girl -- in which she was forced to confront Larry Dubinsky in person, in the presence of multiple, mostly male faculty who were probably not very happy about the situation -- before even deigning to call the girl's parents.  Probably the only reason it got to the point of calling the girl's parents is because the girl refused to back down.  And, from what I've been told, the only reason it got to the point where the girl was even taken seriously in the first place, was due to the efforts of one sole faculty member (not surprisingly, no longer associated with Hyde School).

                    Mind you, Larry Dubinsky had been on this behavior path for some time, and none of the girls' complaints had been taken seriously up to that point.

                    From the Complaint, a few posts up:
                    Quote
                    10. When the plaintiff complained to the defendants administrators about the aforesaid misconduct, she was summoned to a meeting at which she was required to meet with Dubinsky and was criticized by administrators for not wanting to look at Dubinsky during the meeting. The following day, she was summoned to yet another meeting with administrators, which the administrators concealed from her parents. When school officials were informed in September of 2001 that the plaintiff was suffering from recurring nightmares regarding Dubinsky, a faculty member falsely accused the plaintiff of flirting with another male teacher. Her mother's pleas to the defendant's highest administrators that Dubinsky be kept away from the plaintiff and not allowed on school grounds were rejected. In February of 2002, the plaintiff was required to serve as a waitress at a party given the defendant's headmaster at which other under-age students were required to serve alcoholic beverages. Dubinsky was an invited guest at that party.


                    From another post on the forum:
                      http://wwf.fornits.com/viewtopic.php?t=15689&start=322[/url][/list]
                      « Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
                      -------------- -------------- --------------

                      Offline Che Gookin

                      • Global Moderator
                      • Newbie
                      • *****
                      • Posts: 4241
                      • Karma: +11/-3
                        • View Profile
                      Re: Your experience
                      « Reply #59 on: November 25, 2007, 06:56:53 PM »
                      Quote from: ""hurrikayne""
                      Oh my Gawd.  I thought I had things bad (oh, and I did...just see anything whatsoever to do with Roloff's...).  You folks seriously went through some shit too.  I really believed that no one else had been through similar crap.  That's such a shallow and whiny point of view, surprisingly.  Never thought of myself as shallow & whiny before...


                      If you have some free time I'd love to discuss the particulars of Roloff's.
                      « Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »