The Loudoun County Public Schools (LCPS) said the school board did not know about an alleged sexual assault that occurred in the girl’s bathroom at a high school. The schools also would not say if the boy is the same suspect in another alleged assault at another school in October.
The Loudoun Sheriff’s Office released a statement about the October 8 incident on its Facebook page.
The Daily Wire reported on the May 28 incident. But it would have come out earlier if cops didn’t arrest Scott Smith at a June school board meeting. He wanted to publicly accuse the school board of hiding his daughter’s alleged sexual assault.
A source told The Daily Wire the same person committed both crimes.
From The Loudoun Times-Minor:
“LCPS takes student privacy seriously and cannot reveal details concerning the actions of any specific student,” school officials said in the statement. The statement says principals are legally required to report to law enforcement any act that may constitute a felony offense — including sexual assault — under Virginia Code § 22.1-279.3:1. School officials said they followed the reporting law.“Loudoun County Sheriff’s Office was contacted within minutes of receiving the initial report on May 28,” LCPS officials wrote, referring to the alleged incident at Stone Bridge. “Once a matter has been reported to law enforcement, LCPS does not begin its investigation until law enforcement advises LCPS that it has completed the criminal investigation.”
Parents have lashed out at the school board. LCPS insisted the board did not know about May 28.
The sheriff’s office also explained why it reported the October 8 incident and not May 28:
LCPS officials, in an effort to maintain the student suspect’s due process in the alleged May 28 sexual assault, said school board members were not made aware of the incident until it was reported in the media earlier this week.In response to an inquiry by the Times-Mirror asking why the Oct. 8 incident was publicly reported while the May 28 incident was not, a sheriff’s office spokesperson wrote in an email that the two cases were fundamentally different.“The May 28, 2021 case involved a different set of circumstances and a thorough 2-month-long investigation was conducted to determine the facts of the case prior to arrest,” the spokesperson wrote. “This case is still pending court proceedings.”The spokesperson added that “Juvenile reports are excluded from disclosure pursuant to Virginia Code §16.1-301 and Criminal history information is exempt under Virginia Code §19.2-389.”
CLICK HERE FOR FULL VERSION OF THIS STORY