A couple of questions for WS.

 

1. Did Trame tell his team to keep quiet about this incident so Sullivan could travel to Florida with the team?

2. Did WV administrators tip off Sullivan's Dad about the BC Police investigation?

3. Did WV administrators lie to the KHSAA about the reason for the transfer?

 

If any or one of these took place, I find that to be very disturbing.

 

You seem to be defending Sullivan. Do you think this is a witch hunt and he is being treated unfairly? Is he innocent in your opinion?

Are you serious? No one and I mean NO ONE has said that. No one has said you should have sympathy for either child. I have simply stated that there are two sides to EVERY story and many people are making hasty judgements based on one side when they don't know all of the facts. And from that you get you're supposed to have sympathy???

Your comment seemed to indicate that Sullivan deserved some sympathy because of the events he wasn't allowed to attend. Did I misinterpret that?

When I said "How do you go from sexual abuse to a reduced charge of "harassment and he didn't even touch her?" That was a question, HOW do you go from something that servere to something that is basically a slap on the wrist? NOT saying he was proven innocent, he wasn't proven anything, as there was a plea for a lesser "harrasment" charge. This question was never answered, still wondering how you go from one extreem to the other in a courtroom?

 

It's called a plea bargain. He gets the benefit of pleading to a lesser offense than the crime that his actions comprised, the girl does not have to go through the pain and embarrassment of a possible trial, and the court system benefits as it is one less case that the prosecutor/judge have to handle. Doesn't at all mean that a more serious offense wasn't committed or couldn't have been proven. As far as "he wasn't proven anything" - yes, he was, though "proven" may not be the correct term. He pled guilty and was found guilty by the court. He has a conviction on his record. During his plea in court, he would have had to acknowledge his actions/crime to the judge, otherwise the plea would not have been accepted.

Which of the serious allegations are in dispute?

 

At least two of the assaults were verified.

 

The school did not keep him from being around the girl.

 

The school did not abide by the Sheriff's mandate to not tell the Sullivan family about the investigation.

 

The school did not abide by its own rules.

 

Until we hear from the school we will not know what protocol they followed and whether or not they "abided by their own rules". We only have the accusations of the plaintiff currently to go on. That is why I keep saying, wait to judge this situation until you have all of the facts.

Also, since Walton is a very small town, it could have been that the school did not abide by the sherriff's mandate OR it could have been a case of small town such & such knows such & such & things got back to people. WE DON'T KNOW. Again, this is why I said wait until the school makes a statement on the situation.

A couple of questions for WS.

 

1. Did Trame tell his team to keep quiet about this incident so Sullivan could travel to Florida with the team?

2. Did WV administrators tip off Sullivan's Dad about the BC Police investigation?

3. Did WV administrators lie to the KHSAA about the reason for the transfer?

 

If any or one of these took place, I find that to be very disturbing.

 

You seem to be defending Sullivan. Do you think this is a witch hunt and he is being treated unfairly? Is he innocent in your opinion?

All good questions! 1,2 and 3 will be answered soon enough, and as I have stated on my opinion that is some of the stuff is true, then some adults need to pay a price.

Duh...... no kidding!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Whatever happened shouldn't have happened....but it did. I'm sure if both parties had it to do over again that it would have been a different story.

 

Sorry, but that is a very odd statement to make. One person, an adult, was convicted of a crime for some pretty abhorent behavior. The other, a 13 year old child, was victimized by the aforementioned adult.

It's called a plea bargain. He gets the benefit of pleading to a lesser offense than the crime that his actions comprised, the girl does not have to go through the pain and embarrassment of a possible trial, and the court system benefits as it is one less case that the prosecutor/judge have to handle. Doesn't at all mean that a more serious offense wasn't committed or couldn't have been proven. As far as "he wasn't proven anything" - yes, he was, though "proven" may not be the correct term. He pled guilty and was found guilty by the court. He has a conviction on his record. During his plea in court, he would have had to acknowledge his actions/crime to the judge, otherwise the plea would not have been accepted.

Thank you for the explanation.

 

But he was just convicted of harassment correct? I am in NO way saying that is all he did. Just trying to understand how this all plays out in court. Did he have to acknowlege all the other things mentioned? Thanks again.

Your comment seemed to indicate that Sullivan deserved some sympathy because of the events he wasn't allowed to attend. Did I misinterpret that?

Yes you did. My comment was meant to clarify that the school did in fact keep him from events at WV. Maybe not in the very beginning, for reasons that AGAIN we are not aware, maybe because at the time it was he said/she said, maybe there is more to the OTHER side of the story that those keeping quiet have yet to plaster all over Facebook & the Enquirer as the plaintiffs did. That's why I'm saying hang on until we know everything from both parties.

Yes you did. My comment was meant to clarify that the school did in fact keep him from events at WV. Maybe not in the very beginning, for reasons that AGAIN we are not aware, maybe because at the time it was he said/she said, maybe there is more to the OTHER side of the story that those keeping quiet have yet to plaster all over Facebook & the Enquirer as the plaintiffs did. That's why I'm saying hang on until we know everything from both parties.

 

Do you believe that the principal caught the kid in the act as charged?

Thank you for the explanation.

 

I'm sure you knew it already. But you see it all the time - people permitted to plea to less serious (in some cases, much less serious) crimes than they were actually charged with. Maybe prosecutors couldn't prove the more serious crime, maybe the subject didn't even commit the more serious crime, but maybe it also had to do with saving the victim from further mental harm.

Sounds like you have already made up your mind. And just to clarify, he did NOT play basketball elsewhere. And to go back to another post, he was not permitted to attend functions at WV. His sister played in both the Sweet Sixteen and the All A state and he was not permitted to watch her in either event, nor was he permitted to attend WV's graduation ceremony in support of his childhood friends.

 

I apologize...I thought that he played baseball for another school. Evidently that was in error.

 

Here's what I have made my mind up about:

1) The "Keep 5 Alive" tribute is bizarre, no matter who did it, as the young man did not die.

2) Sullivan did something wrong, as he plead guilty to a crime.

3) If I were a parent in the WV school district, I would want some answers.

4) If I were part of the BOC of the KHSAA, I would be looking very closely at Walton-Verona's athletic department.

I apologize...I thought that he played baseball for another school. Evidently that was in error.

He played baseball at Newport Catholic last spring.

Yes you did. My comment was meant to clarify that the school did in fact keep him from events at WV. Maybe not in the very beginning, for reasons that AGAIN we are not aware, maybe because at the time it was he said/she said, maybe there is more to the OTHER side of the story that those keeping quiet have yet to plaster all over Facebook & the Enquirer as the plaintiffs did. That's why I'm saying hang on until we know everything from both parties.

 

The Enquirer ran a story about a lawsuit filed in federal court. Not sure that equates with the "plaintiffs plastering their story" all over the Enquirer.

A couple of questions for WS.

 

1. Did Trame tell his team to keep quiet about this incident so Sullivan could travel to Florida with the team? I don't know and neither was "Janie, John or Elizabeth Doe"

2. Did WV administrators tip off Sullivan's Dad about the BC Police investigation? I have no clue.

3. Did WV administrators lie to the KHSAA about the reason for the transfer? The plaintiff supposedly called every school that they tried to transfer him.

 

If any or one of these took place, I find that to be very disturbing.

 

You seem to be defending Sullivan. Do you think this is a witch hunt and he is being treated unfairly? Is he innocent in your opinion?

No, I do not think he is innocent necessarily, but you've got to hear all of the facts. I'm not dissing the girl, either, but playing devil's advocate, is it not possible that she could have been more of a willing participant than she admitted?? Not saying she was, but again....for the last time before I go to bed because I'm tired of repeating myself....let's wait to get all of the facts and hear both sides completely. Thanks!

No, I do not think he is innocent necessarily, but you've got to hear all of the facts. I'm not dissing the girl, either, but playing devil's advocate, is it not possible that she could have been more of a willing participant than she admitted?? Not saying she was, but again....

Legally, it doesn't matter ... she was 13 years old.