First a couple quick points of fact: As sad is it is to have to point at the young Dinkel boy in this fiasco, suffice it to say that he (and understandably so, considering what he was put through), was many times the instigator, believe it. By all accounts, he was (and again, understandably), angry, confused, depressed, and offensive. It is entirely inaccurate to paint the other boy the arrogant, rogue, punk OR the timid, pure and pathetic little victim. Secondly, I find interesting, pathetic and sad that neither of these families seem to want this to end?!!? At what point does one find the humility to recognize their own failures and just shut up? I suppose if one continues to point outwardly at all the "bad" long enough and with enough relentless fervor, that somehow their own culpability is erased? As I stated, this has been extremely painful for many. First the horrific assault itself, then two years of constant drama and pain, the victim's family attacks....then the legally requisite counter attacks....now this. One cannot heal properly by constantly ripping open the scabs and re-infecting the sore!

 

Four years that are generally expected to provide this entire class of boys with some of the best years of their young lives have been forever stained by the actions of one very ill adult. This has been an emotional, psychological, legal, and financial disaster for many, many young men and their families. The 'victim', (and that is a literal and legal term), is admittedly not without fault in the decisions he made relative to this entire episode, (before, during and after), however, let us please remember that the reason this is 'illegal' is precisely because young adults (ie 15 yrs old) are not expected to posses the maturity, insight, discretion, context, foresight, fortitude, understanding, etc etc to handle life's "adult" situations properly, adults are, more specifically, parents. Are some young men better prepared than others, maybe?-Yes. Would another boy react better or differently, maybe?-Yes. Are his parents perfect?-No. Does that then permit him to be pursued, manipulated and seduced repeatedly and then scorned for how he deals with the confusion, utter anguish, embarrassment and mess left in the wake? I think not. Is it utterly horrific that a young man of similar age be expected to deal with the mind-blowing realization and constant reminder of his mother's terrible illnesses and subsequent actions all the while fighting his own horrible battle with illness?--Absolutely! Neither should have been dealt these hands and neither should be judged by their respective, and appropriately "immature" (at times), mechanisms for coping.

 

So that leaves the 'adults'. If we must make someone "pay", do we really have to look that far and hasn't the 'system' already garnished it's justice? It's time to look inward for healing and move on! Do we really believe the church, or the school, the police, or anybody else could have prevented any part of this mess? Seriously? There is but one perpetrator, two victims, and massive collateral damage...enough already.........pleeeaaase!

What is the kid's name? Can't we name it here, since he is out of high school?

As to what Beechwood fan said, I totally agree. If he doesn't want this situation being labeled to his name and his life, why not let it go and end it how it should have been ended before this lawsuit came up.

I think the school will have some things to answer too, it is bullying, and with the views on bullying these days they are in trouble, and I would say if there is any evidence of these things being overlooked, they are in trouble.

What is the kid's name? Can't we name it here, since he is out of high school?

 

Doesn't matter since he was a minor at the time of the incident. The Dinkel kid's name is public because he filed the lawsuit.

From the limited public information relating to the merits of this suit, the key to the case is obviously going to be how teachers and administration dealt with the instances where the bullying occurred. When the student clapped in class, did the teacher do anything at all? When other conflicts happened, how did the school react? Obviously there is still a lot of unresolved anger that all parties need to work through. A lawsuit is not a good way to resolve anger IMO. Based on the victim's actions described in the paper and elsewhere, it appears the victim of Mrs. Dinkel is doing what many abuse victims do - continuing the chain of abuse by abusing someone else. Hopefully all parties involved can get the help they need to find inner peace and move forward with their lives.

I agree with Scout 100% (did I really say that?).

 

This lawsuit is a very disturbing continuation of a very said episode. I will forever feel sorry for the victims in this case, and I understand their anger and frustration. However, it truly sickens me that they now try to place blame on the Diocese and CovCath in particular for actions of individuals. The entire CovCath Community was unbelievably supportive of the Dinkel family through out their son's battle with Cancer. To the extent they were legally allowed, they were unbelievably supportive of Alex in regards to the other matter.

 

The bullying was not condoned or ignored or even tolerated. I find it very ironic that both parties involved in the "fights" were upset for taking the "others" side. To me it sounds like CovCath did everything possible to diffuse the situation and be a neutral party in the matter.

 

Very sad that now even more people will forever link that families name to the actions of one very sick individual.

 

Let it fade away please!

I know I'm pretty biased towards Cov Cath, and I certainly also felt some outrage when I initially read this article. However, as I thought through the case a little further, I'm not so sure that this will ever amount to that much. I know I'm not an attorney...but for what it's worth, I did work as a paralegal at the firm who represents the Diocese of Covington, and I've got a little bit of a guess as to what Cov Cath's (and the diocese') approach will be towards their defense.

 

First off, there's the fact that Cov Cath is a private institution. Yes, it is an educational institution, but it's also a private institution, so his claims that his civil rights were violated when he was not better accommodated for his special needs as a cancer survivor seem shaky at best. Cov Cath doesn't have to supply the same accommodations that would be required of a public school. Families make a choice to send their students to private schools and to accept what that school offers. Should private schools offer reasonable accommodations, yes in all likelihood, but I don't see what they were really to do in a situation where they have a student missing MASSIVE amounts of school due to his cancer treatment. I'm sure that was difficult for him as a high schooler, but that seems part and partial to the fact that he had to deal with cancer. A shame, yes, but sometimes life is hard. Furthermore, Cov Cath was VERY supportive of Alex throughout his cancer treatment and recovery. If they want evidence, than they need go no further than the near-weekly email updates that were sent out to the entire Cov Cath alumni network letting everyone know how Alex's treatment was going, and asking for their constant prayers and moral support.

 

Cov Cath’s “wrongdoing” for their refusal to accept a scholarship endowment on Alex's behalf is also going to be a tough sell. First of all, Cov Cath has a long-standing precedent of naming scholarships after retired/deceased long-term faculty members or after deceased students/alumni. Alex Dinkle does not fit into either of those parameters. Secondly, that's an awfully hard spot to put a Catholic school in when they are asked to accept money from, among other people, a woman who statutorily raped one of their students, as part of a "memorial" for her (still-living) child. As a side note, who does that anyway?? "Hey, I want you to start a scholarship after me."

 

As far as the "bullying" accusations go, from a legal standpoint bullying has to be reported/addressed if it "any employee of a school or a local board of education who knows or has reasonable cause to believe that a school student has been the victim of a violation of any felony offense specified in KRS Chapter 508 committed by another student while on school premises, on school-sponsored transportation, or at a school-sponsored event". KRS Chapter 508 addresses felony assault, menacing (placing someone in reasonable apprehension of imminent physical danger), wanton endangerment (endangering someone's life), criminal abuse, stalking, or terroristic threatening. From the sounds of things, the only verified case of any of these things was the case where the "victim" assaulted Alex in the cafeteria, which was addressed by the faculty and ended in suspension of the student. Sure, the “victim” didn’t handle things well, and I know Alex didn’t put himself in the position he ended up in, but maybe Alex needs to get angry with his mom, who took advantage of a not-yet-fully matured teenager, and had sex with him. Can you really expect a 15 year old to act like a mature adult in that situation? I don’t mean to remove the “victim” from responsibility for his own actions, but come on, I think one of the major morals of this story is “Don’t have sex with your 15 year old son’s 15 year old friends.” Of course there are going to be unpredictable reactions to all of these things…which could have easily been avoided by Jeni Lee Dinkel not having sex with a 15 year old.

 

My last comment is regarding the remark from the article that says, “this suit was brought by Alex Dinkel, and his parents are not parties to the action”. Sure, they may not be parties to the action, but you’re telling me that they aren’t footing the bill for their son to hire a hot-shot attorney? Along those lines, as well, the fact that they went and hired one of Larry Flynt’s defense attorneys to represent Alex…that’s a real “class move”. Give me a break. Let it die.

Alex Dinkel is a victim, that is clear. But he is not a victim of actions from CovCath he is a victim because of the illegal and immoral actions of his mother.

As far as the situation that ColonelsWearBlue was talking about in the cafeteria, there was no assault that really happened, as like I said, I was a student at the time and witnessed the situation. Alex had said a few things at a different table that the 'victim' overheard (that were meant for the 'victim' to hear to instigate something) and the 'victim' reacted by yelling at him. He may have said a couple threatening things, but the 'victim' made it clear that if he did not have cancer, something would have happened. He was never going to touch or hurt Alex, he was making it clear that he knew that the only reason he was saying the things he was about the 'victim' is because he knew the 'victim' couldn't touch him. Quite immature action if you ask me. Not to mention the staff at CovCath broke the argument up within seconds and the 'victim' was suspended. What more do they want?

 

Alex and his family have dragged this out for entirely too long.

Edited May 19, 201016 yr by Blue Magic

You know I think I never agree with Eric Deters, but he was on the radio earlier today, and he said basically the same thing - let it die and go away! Let everyone get over it. I have always felt said for Alex and his did. First that Alex got sick, and for both for what happened with Jeni. IMP, while I was not at the school everyday, what I heard from parents, teachers, and students led me to feel that the school and the students went above and beyong for Alex. I recall the daily update emails and reading the thanks the family had for the school, how wonderful the school was and now the family, I mean Alex, is repaying his gratitude with a lawsuit? Now, I think I feel as much anger towards them as I always have towards the victim - not because he spoke, or was a victim. I do feel for him on that front. However, it has always seemed to me that the victim and his family have tried to profit from this whole thing. The T shirt thing was a classic example. When I saw him wearing that I was in complete shock. Why would he and his family want to keep this whole thing on the front pages? Now Alex is doing the same darn thing. Amazing, simply amazing.

The kid wore a "Moms Love Me" shirt?

 

 

WOW

 

:lol: Ok,ok... I know that this is not funny, but... :lol:

Any of my fellow BGP'ers think this is about nothing more than a big payday for the Dinkel's? They know the Diocesan has cash and imho, this whole thing is about them trying to get some of it. I really hope the Diocesan does not cave and settle this out of court. I also know that it is sometimes the least expensive way to go as well, just hope it doesn't turn out that way. They don't deserve a dime. Are the Dinkel's having financial difficulties?

First of all, let it be known that I'm behind CovCath 110%. Alex's treatment by the Covington Catholic community was not in any way inappropriate. The school as a whole supported Alex tremendously. I don't understand how the school could be held responsible for him being harrassed by students for a few reasons starting with the fact that he wasn't harassaed at all. I recall seeing a few incidents between Alex and the "victim", but let me assure you that both parties were responsible for the minor scuffles. As far as the school work, is the school supposed to make the courses easier with less work for him? The teachers at Covington Catholic are first rate and are there to help out the students as much as they need, and even more. I'm frankly baffled by this situation. The accusations offend me. I would honestly like to know what the Dinkel's really want from this. In my opinion, it's going to make a bad situation for the family more dramatic than it needs to be.

How would these allegations be proved?