The plaintiffs, identified as Jane Doe 1 and Jane Doe 2, allege that Parham used his position of authority to groom and sexually exploit them over an extended period. Jane Doe 1 reportedly endured at least 50 sexual assaults on school property between May and November 2023.

Perhaps most egregious is the claim that school officials were aware that Parham—an adult security guard—actually accompanied Jane Doe 1 to the school prom, an overt red flag that seemingly went unaddressed by administration.

Jane Doe 2 described a similar pattern of grooming that involved inappropriate “play fighting” used as a pretext for unwanted touching and sexualized comments regarding her body.

The lawsuit asserts that these were not isolated incidents. It references a third student from a related legal action (Civil Action No. 24CV067742) who was also allegedly molested by Parham on campus during the fall of 2023.

Central to the lawsuit is the accusation that the Emery Unified School District fostered an environment of “willful blindness.” The complaint alleges that teachers, coaches, and even a principal observed blatant warning signs as early as the start of the 2022-2023 school year.

Attorney Robert Allard, representing the plaintiffs, emphasized that the school district bears a fundamental responsibility for the safety of its students. “School should be a safe place for students to learn and grow—not where trusted adults exploit vulnerable minors,” Allard stated. He argued that the district’s failure to act on clear warning signs “irreparably harmed multiple young women.”

The lawsuit seeks to hold the district accountable for its failure to implement proper oversight and for ignoring the safety protocols designed to prevent exactly this type of predatory behavior. By seeking civil damages, the plaintiffs aim to highlight the catastrophic consequences of institutional silence and ensure that such a breakdown in student protection never recurs within the district.

The survivor, identified in legal filings as Jane Doe, was a fifteen-year-old freshman during the 2002–2003 school year when she was targeted by her teacher, Shawn Thomas. The lawsuit detailed a calculated process of grooming that led to numerous sexual assaults, many of which occurred on school grounds.

According to the complaint, Thomas utilized his position of authority to isolate the student, frequently assaulting her in his portable classroom and a storage room located within the boys’ locker room. The abuse eventually resulted in Doe becoming pregnant at age 15. The lawsuit further alleges that Thomas pressured and forced the minor to undergo an abortion in the spring of 2003.

Central to the $5.75 million settlement is the disturbing allegation that the school’s administration was aware of the inappropriate relationship but failed to intervene. The lawsuit highlights a specific incident where Thomas’s wife, Sarah Thomas, who served as the Dean of Leigh High School at the time, allegedly discovered the victim alone with her husband in his classroom. The pair had reportedly stopped their sexual encounter abruptly as they saw her approaching.

Even more distressing are the claims regarding Jane Doe’s attempts to seek help. After becoming pregnant, Doe allegedly disclosed to Sarah Thomas that Shawn Thomas had been having sexual intercourse with her. Rather than fulfilling her duty as a mandatory reporter and school administrator, Sarah Thomas allegedly responded by blaming the victim. The lawsuit claims the Dean asked the young student how she “could do this to her” after everything she had done for the student.

Following this confrontation, the abuse did not stop. Shawn Thomas reportedly continued to sexually assault the victim on school property, including the aforementioned storage room incidents.

The abuse remained hidden for years until the survivor’s sister urged her to come forward to law enforcement. Shawn Thomas was finally arrested last year following a formal disclosure of the rapes.

In a statement regarding the settlement, the survivor’s sister noted that while financial compensation cannot undo the trauma, it represents a vital step toward accountability. “This settlement is one more step toward my sister reclaiming her life after the immense harm she endured,” she stated. She expressed hope that this legal resolution ensures no other student is “ignored or unprotected in the way she was.”

The size of the settlement reflects the severity of the institutional failures at Leigh High School. By failing to investigate clear red flags and allegedly allowing a high-ranking administrator to silence a victim, the district left a minor in a position of extreme vulnerability.

The resolution of this case underscores the ongoing legal shift toward holding educational institutions responsible for historical abuse, particularly when administrative negligence allowed predators to operate with impunity.

The lawsuit was filed on behalf of a young athlete identified as John Doe, who joined the program in April 2021 at eleven years old. The complaint described repeated sexual abuse by former coach Kevin Whitmer. According to the filing, Whitmer engaged in grooming behavior that escalated over time into explicit sexual acts.

The complaint alleged Whitmer instructed the child to sit on his lap and engage in inappropriate physical contact. These interactions reportedly included intimate touching disguised as “massages.” The alleged abuse later escalated into sexual acts that occurred in private locker room settings within team facilities.

A central claim in the lawsuit focused on institutional failure by Sharks Sports & Entertainment, LLC and its subsidiary Sharks Ice, LLC. The complaint argued these organizations failed in their duty to protect young athletes. It asserted they allowed unsupervised locker room access and private electronic communication between coaches and minors.

The lawsuit also described repeated warnings that were allegedly ignored by management. A program supervisor reportedly notified leadership multiple times about Whitmer violating locker room policies. Despite these alerts, no effective corrective action was taken, and enforcement of safety protocols remained inadequate.

The complaint further stated that parents had noticed Whitmer’s unusual conduct around players. Some reportedly observed behavior that made athletes visibly uncomfortable. These concerns, combined with internal warnings, were not addressed in a timely or meaningful way, allowing the alleged abuse to continue unchecked.

The case also pointed to failures in following established safety guidelines set by USA Hockey. These policies are designed to prevent misconduct through supervision requirements and communication restrictions. The lawsuit claimed that these standards were not properly enforced within the organization.

Sharks Sports & Entertainment owns the NHL’s San Jose Sharks and operates several sports facilities in the region. The settlement highlights the importance of strict oversight in youth sports organizations. It also emphasizes the need for consistent enforcement of athlete protection policies.

This case reflects the lasting consequences of institutional negligence and the vulnerability of young athletes. It serves as a reminder that safeguarding measures must be actively implemented, not merely established on paper, to prevent harm and protect participants.

In May 2025, Flaherty’s arrest followed a police-monitored phone call where he allegedly urged the teenager to have an abortion. He sought to protect his reputation and family, the complaint states. Now, he faces serious criminal charges, including forcible rape of a child and assault with intent to commit a felony. Additional charges include unlawful sexual intercourse, highlighting the severity of his alleged actions.

The lawsuit details Flaherty’s grooming behaviors, which included giving Jane Doe special attention and communicating through private messages. He also allegedly offered her rides in his personal vehicle and isolated her in his office. The door was often closed or locked, creating a dangerous environment. These actions, the lawsuit claims, formed a pattern of inappropriate conduct. Charthouse Public Schools failed to address this behavior, despite multiple warnings.

Students, parents, and staff reportedly raised concerns about Flaherty’s actions, but the administration did not respond adequately. In January 2025, a parent reported that their daughter felt uneasy about Flaherty’s inappropriate attention. Another report claimed he allowed students to vape in his office. Rumors swirled about Flaherty providing alcohol to students and engaging in an affair with a student. Executive Director Catherine Foster allegedly dismissed these concerns as baseless, allowing the misconduct to continue unchecked.

The lawsuit argues that Charthouse Public Schools neglected its legal duties under California’s Child Abuse and Neglect Reporting Act. The school failed to report suspicions of abuse to law enforcement or child protective services. No investigations were conducted, and Flaherty faced no discipline. This inaction, the complaint asserts, enabled the alleged assault to occur.

Beyond failing to act on reports, the school breached its duty to ensure a safe learning environment. The lawsuit claims Charthouse did not properly screen or supervise Flaherty. It also neglected to train staff to recognize and prevent grooming behaviors. These failures left students vulnerable to harm.

Attorney Lauren Cerri, representing Jane Doe, emphasized the broader implications of the case. “This highlights systemic failures in ensuring student safety,” she said. Schools must adopt stronger policies to protect students from abuse, she urged. Proactive measures, including better training and oversight, are essential to prevent such incidents.

The lawsuit seeks to hold Charthouse Public Schools accountable for its alleged negligence. It underscores the need for schools to prioritize student safety above all else. By failing to act on clear warning signs, the administration allowed a dangerous situation to escalate. The case serves as a stark reminder of the consequences of inaction.

Jane Doe’s experience has sparked calls for reform within Charthouse Public Schools and beyond. Schools must enforce robust policies to detect and address inappropriate behavior. The lawsuit aims to ensure such failures are not repeated. It also seeks justice for a student whose trust was betrayed. As the case moves forward, it raises critical questions about accountability in educational institutions. Protecting students requires vigilance, training, and a commitment to act swiftly on concerns. Only then can schools truly provide a safe environment for learning.

One of the plaintiffs, referenced in the lawsuit as John Doe 1, made particularly harrowing allegations. He stated that the experience forced him to relive traumatic memories and cost him years of his life. He also expressed his gratitude to Ms. Cerri:

I had the privilege of being represented by Lauren Cerri  in a very difficult and sensitive civil case. From the very beginning, she showed an exceptional level of professionalism, care, and sensitivity in handling such a deeply personal matter. She was always prompt in her responses and honest when setting expectations, which gave me a sense of trust and clarity throughout the process. One of the things I valued most was how she allowed me to decide how much or how little I wanted to be kept in the loop at any given time. This was incredibly helpful, as it made an overwhelming process feel more manageable. Her thoughtfulness and compassion were evident in every conversation we had. She prepared me thoroughly for each step, especially for the difficult moments when I had to face questioning from the defense. Because of her preparation and support, I always felt ready and confident. What stood out most was her unwavering presence and commitment. She even attended the sentencing of the criminal trial that lead to my civil suit, which was above and beyond what I expected. Having her there was immensely supportive and meant more to me than I can put into words. I am truly grateful for Lauren’s guidance, professionalism, and care. She not only represented me as a client but also supported me as a person during one of the hardest times of my life. I could not have asked for a better advocate. John Doe 1

Doe 1 expressed that “there is no amount of money” that could fully compensate for the abuse he endured or the way it altered his life’s trajectory.

According to the lawsuit, Wilson used his position as head of the school’s broadcast group to isolate the young student in a locked, windowless, soundproof room on school grounds, where the abuse took place. All incidents occurred while both the teacher and student were under the supervision of the school district. The lawsuit alleges the District failed to properly monitor Wilson, allowing his predatory behavior to continue unchecked for years.

Attorney Lauren Cerri, representing the victim, called the $6 million settlement a powerful warning to parents, educators, and school officials about the hidden dangers of trusted educators who conceal their abuse behind a facade of mentorship. She emphasized the importance of vigilance and proactive measures to safeguard children, especially as students return to classrooms each new school year.

The investigation revealed troubling details beyond the sexual abuse. In February 2020, fifth-grade students reported Wilson’s verbal and emotional abuse, including racist slurs, name-calling, and inappropriate conduct such as spraying students with water. Despite repeated complaints and a district reprimand for violating teaching standards, Wilson was not removed from his position.

In 2021, further allegations arose, including use of racist language and offensive behavior, culminating in another district investigation that again found violations of teaching standards but resulted only in a letter of reprimand. This pattern of inadequate oversight is central to the lawsuit’s claim that the district’s negligence enabled Wilson’s “serial predation” on students.

Wilson was arrested in January 2023 and later pled guilty in 2025 to nine counts of lewd acts upon a child, admitting to abusing multiple victims. He was sentenced to 215 years to life in prison. Authorities found videos and evidence of abuse at both the school and Wilson’s home.

The lawsuit also highlights prior warning signs that went unheeded, such as yard duty supervisors noting Wilson’s suspicious behavior with female students during lunch recesses. Despite these red flags, the district failed to take decisive action to protect students.

Attorney Cerri stressed that stronger supervision and accountability by the district could have prevented much of the abuse. She called on other potential victims to come forward, underscoring the broader implications of the case for schools and communities.

This $6 million settlement stands as a stark reminder of the critical need for schools to rigorously screen, supervise, and monitor staff to ensure student safety. It sends a clear message that failure to act on warning signs not only endangers children but also exposes districts to serious legal and financial consequences. Parents, educators, and administrators are urged to maintain heightened awareness and to foster environments where abuse cannot be concealed or tolerated.

The first lawsuit involves a current student, identified only as Jane Doe. She claims she was groomed and sexually assaulted by her woodshop instructor, Paul Spinetti, during the 2024-2025 academic year. The student was a freshman enrolled in special education classes at the time of the alleged abuse.

According to the complaint, after disclosing the assault to her mother, law enforcement was notified and Spinetti was arrested on felony charges related to lewd and lascivious acts. The lawsuit accuses the district of ignoring prior allegations and rumors about Spinetti’s inappropriate behavior, which dated back several years. These included inappropriate touching, sexually suggestive gifts made in class, and comments targeted at female students. Despite multiple reports from students and parents over the years, no investigations or disciplinary actions were reportedly taken by the district, nor were authorities or child protective agencies informed as required by law.

Parallel to this case, another Jane Doe, a former student, filed a lawsuit regarding abuse she alleges occurred during her junior and senior years (2015-2017) at Terra Nova High. She claims that her chemistry teacher, Ross Robert Ellison, exploited his position to groom her through special attention such as private meetings, lunches, personal emails, rides off campus, and conversations outside school hours. The grooming escalated to sexual assault off school grounds. The abuse, according to the lawsuit, was widely known among students, evidenced by public displays of affection, his attendance at school events with her, and frequent solitary encounters in his classroom. After the student graduated, the school was reportedly made aware of the abuse by another student but took minimal action. Ellison resigned or was terminated soon afterward, although he still holds a valid California teaching credential.

Both lawsuits claim the district was aware of the teachers’ grooming and abusive behaviors yet failed to properly screen, supervise, investigate, or report the conduct. The law firm asserts that the district neglected its responsibility by overlooking complaints, failing to provide staff training on detecting grooming behavior, inadequately monitoring classrooms, and protecting its reputation at the expense of student safety.

“These cases reveal a disturbing pattern of negligence and oversight by the district that allowed predatory behavior to continue unchecked, leaving vulnerable students exposed to harm,” said attorney Lauren Cerri.

The lawsuits seek accountability and highlight the need for systemic changes to ensure student welfare is prioritized in district policies and practices.

The case, emerging nearly 50 years after the alleged abuse, highlights both the enduring impact of childhood trauma and the evolving legal landscape that has enabled survivors to seek justice decades later.

The MVWSD settlement addresses claims by two former Crittenden Middle School students who allege that Myers groomed and sexually assaulted them in the 1970s. The allegations center on Myers’ operation of the Traveling School Summer Program, a six-week initiative targeting students with behavioral and academic challenges. Described as a “school on wheels,” the program incorporated controversial elements, including “Body Theme Days” where students were required to wear minimal clothing, such as bikinis or speedos, and participate in massage sessions led by Myers.

Depositions from the lawsuit revealed a shocking lack of oversight: no policies governed teacher-student interactions, background checks were not conducted, and the district failed to supervise the program adequately.

The MVWSD settlement is part of a larger legal reckoning involving Myers, whose actions extended beyond Mountain View. The case parallels a 2024 settlement by SCCS, where similar allegations surfaced, pointing to a pattern of abuse across multiple school districts.

The Santa Cruz City Schools Lawsuit and Settlement

In 2024, Santa Cruz City Schools settled for $4.5 million with two former students who alleged abuse by Myers between 1987 and 1991, during his tenure as principal of Branciforte Junior High School from 1981 to 1984. The plaintiffs claimed Myers used his authority to perpetrate sexual abuse, exploiting the same Traveling School Summer Program he had run at Crittenden. The program, later integrated into the SCCS curriculum, targeted vulnerable students, many from unstable home environments, and included questionable practices, such as massage classes and “body discovery” objectives.

One plaintiff, identified as John Doe 4, was a gifted athlete in the Gifted and Talented Education (GATE) program whose life was derailed by the abuse. His dreams of college and sports crumbled, leading to struggles with depression, drug addiction, and a sense of indifference toward his own survival. The SCCS lawsuit revealed that the district failed to conduct background checks or evaluate Myers during his employment, despite earlier red flags from his time at Crittenden. The lack of oversight allowed Myers to continue his predatory behavior unchecked, with no rules governing inappropriate teacher-student interactions, such as sharing rooms on trips or conducting massages.

The SCCS settlement, like the MVWSD case, exposed systemic failures in school administration during the 1970s and 1980s, raising questions about how such misconduct went unaddressed for so long. Both settlements reflect a growing recognition of the need for accountability in educational institutions, particularly for historical abuses that have left lasting scars on survivors.

Why the Lawsuit Took 50 Years

The MVWSD lawsuit, filed nearly 50 years after the alleged abuse, was made possible by significant changes in California law that have expanded victims’ rights. In 1973, when the alleged abuses at Crittenden occurred, California’s legal framework posed significant barriers for survivors of childhood sexual abuse. Additionally, plaintiffs had to file a government tort claim against a public entity like a school district within 100 days of the incident (Government Code § 911.2). These strict deadlines, combined with the absence of a “delayed discovery” rule for childhood sexual abuse, made it nearly impossible for survivors to pursue legal action if they did not report the abuse immediately.

Many survivors, including those in the MVWSD and SCCS cases, repressed their trauma or feared disbelief, further delaying legal action. The lack of robust mandatory reporting laws (the modern Child Abuse and Neglect Reporting Act was not fully developed until later) meant schools often failed to act on warning signs, and abusers like Myers avoided scrutiny.

The passage of the California Child Victims Act (AB 218) in 2020 was a game-changer. Effective January 1, 2020, AB 218 eliminated the statute of limitations for childhood sexual abuse claims filed on or after January 1, 2024, and opened a three-year lookback window (2020–2022) for survivors to file claims for older abuses, regardless of expired deadlines. This legal reform allowed the MVWSD and SCCS plaintiffs to bring their cases decades later, seeking justice for harm suffered in the 1970s and 1980s. The extended statutes of limitations and revival window were critical in enabling survivors to confront the long-term impact of their trauma, which often manifests years later in the form of mental health challenges, addiction, or broken relationships.

Myers resigned from SCCS in 1991 amid concerns but faced no criminal prosecution due to statutes of limitations and jurisdictional issues. His teaching credentials were revoked in California and Colorado after reports of sexual misconduct surfaced. Allegations against him are extensive: at least 11 men have reported sexual abuse, and over 20 men and boys have described unwanted or abusive sexual experiences during their minor years. These claims span multiple locations, including Mountain View, Santa Cruz, and Denver.

These cases highlight the importance of modern safeguards, such as mandatory background checks, robust reporting laws, and trauma-informed support for survivors. For survivors, these settlements offer a measure of closure, though the scars of abuse endure.

The plaintiffs, both minors at San Ramon Valley High School during the period of abuse, accused Weible of exploiting his authority to groom and sexually abuse them over several years. The abuse took place in various locations, including school grounds, Weible’s vehicle, his apartment, and during a school-sponsored senior trip to New York City. The lawsuit, filed in February 2024, highlighted the district’s negligence in addressing clear warning signs of Weible’s misconduct.

Attorney Lauren Cerri, representing the plaintiffs, criticized SRVUSD’s response, stating, “The district ignored obvious indicators of inappropriate conduct, failing to intervene, investigate, or report suspicions to authorities. They neglected disciplinary procedures and failed to train staff adequately to recognize grooming and abuse, allowing Weible’s actions to continue unchecked.” Cerri also noted that the district permitted Weible to resign quietly without reporting him to the Commission on Teacher Credentialing or fully cooperating with police, withholding critical information.

One plaintiff, identified as Jane Doe, expressed deep frustration with SRVUSD’s handling of the situation. “The district prioritized its reputation over student safety, enabling Weible to endanger multiple students,” she said. “Parents should trust that schools protect their children and follow proper policies, but SRVUSD failed. Instead of taking accountability to prevent future abuse, they shielded a predator to protect themselves. This behavior is unacceptable, and we must remain vigilant to ensure student safety.”

The lawsuit detailed Weible’s predatory behavior, which was reportedly overt and noticeable to both staff and students. Actions such as showing favoritism, engaging in excessive physical contact like prolonged hugs or having students sit on his lap, and spending private time with female students behind closed doors were cited as red flags. Despite these warning signs, the district allegedly took no meaningful action until 2012, after both plaintiffs had graduated.

The core of the case rested on SRVUSD’s alleged gross negligence in fulfilling its duty to supervise and protect students from foreseeable harm. The plaintiffs argued that the district’s inaction breached its responsibility to ensure a safe learning environment, allowing Weible’s abuse to persist. The settlement, just $100 short of $7 million, underscores the severity of the district’s failures and serves as a stark reminder of the consequences of mishandling abuse allegations.

This resolution, reached weeks before a scheduled jury trial on September 15, 2025, highlights the need for systemic change in how schools address allegations of misconduct. The case emphasizes the importance of robust policies, clear accountability, and comprehensive staff training to identify and respond to grooming and abuse. A school culture that encourages reporting and prioritizes student safety is critical to preventing future harm.

The settlement also sends a broader message to educational institutions about the legal and moral obligations to protect students. As Jane Doe stated, “I know I’m not the first, and sadly not the last, but we must keep fighting for safer schools.” The nearly $7 million payout reflects not only the harm caused to the plaintiffs but also the urgent need for districts to take proactive measures to safeguard students and address misconduct promptly.

The case underscores the ongoing challenges schools face in ensuring student safety and the consequences of failing to act decisively.

Word count: 650

According to the complaint, the abuse began in the 2001-2002 school year when Waldorf arranged for Jane Doe 1, then a sophomore, to be tutored by Davis through One Smart Kid. Davis allegedly used his authority and access to groom Jane Doe 1, holding tutoring sessions in isolated classrooms, discussing his own sexual experiences, and initiating inappropriate physical contact. The grooming escalated to repeated sexual abuse on school grounds. The lawsuit details a particularly egregious incident in which a school administrator discovered Jane Doe 1 disheveled with Davis in a secluded area but failed to investigate or report the incident to authorities. Despite this warning sign, Davis continued to abuse Jane Doe 1 throughout her junior year.

The following school year, instead of removing Davis, Waldorf offered him a part-time teaching position. During the 2003-2004 academic year, Davis allegedly used his new role to groom Jane Doe 2, then a sophomore, eventually leading to multiple sexual assaults. The lawsuit claims Davis would drive Jane Doe 2 home after school events and sexually assault her during these drives or at his apartment. The pattern of abuse mirrored his earlier conduct with Jane Doe 1, suggesting a repeated failure by the school and the tutoring company to recognize or act on red flags.

The complaint asserts that both the San Francisco Waldorf School and One Smart Kid were negligent in hiring, supervising, and retaining Davis, even after clear warning signs and opportunities to intervene. It further alleges that the institutions failed to fulfill their legal obligation to report suspected child abuse, even after Jane Doe 1 disclosed the abuse years later to a teacher. Rather than supporting the victim or alerting authorities, the school allegedly dismissed her concerns and failed to take any action.

Attorney Mark Boskovich, representing the plaintiffs, stated, “This lawsuit isn’t just about the past; it’s a critical call for all educational institutions to rigorously vet, supervise, and act decisively to protect students. When that duty is breached, the harm to the victims is lifelong and demands redress”.

The case highlights broader concerns about institutional responsibility and the long-term impact of childhood sexual abuse, underscoring the need for schools and educational organizations to prioritize student safety and respond decisively to allegations of misconduct.

The new complaint centers on an incident at Christopher High School involving Jane Doe, a minor who was violently assaulted and bullied by another student, Heather Doe, on March 8, 2024. The attack occurred during a passing period, with Heather Doe reportedly pulling Jane’s hoodie over her head, knocking her to the ground, and physically assaulting her for several minutes. The incident was captured on video by students and sent to Jane’s mother. Notably, no staff members were present to intervene during the assault. The lawsuit alleges that school officials were aware of Heather Doe’s history of violent behavior but failed to warn or adequately inform campus staff, and did not take sufficient preventive measures.

Jane Doe’s mother had previously raised concerns with the district about ongoing campus violence, frequent fights, and insufficient adult supervision. She was told that the problems were due to a lack of supervisors and funding. Following the attack, Jane Doe no longer felt safe attending school and is now being homeschooled. The lawsuit claims the district breached its duty to supervise and protect students, failed to adhere to mandatory safety regulations, and neglected to implement effective safety plans.

This case is the third in a series of lawsuits filed by the same law firm against GUSD. The first lawsuit, settled for $100,000, involved a former Solorsano Middle School student who was assaulted on campus after her parents had warned school officials twice about threats against their child. The assault resulted in a concussion and was also recorded and disseminated online. Testimony from a former Solorsano Middle School employee revealed a troubling pattern of weekly physical altercations on campus, with the employee personally intervening in several fights and being aware of students requiring hospital treatment due to campus violence.

A second lawsuit, filed in September 2023, remains ongoing. It accuses the district of failing to protect a ninth-grade developmentally disabled student at Christopher High School from a violent attack by a classmate who had been bullying him. All three lawsuits cite the California Education Code, which mandates that school officials safeguard students’ well-being.

The complaints highlight a broader culture of violence and bullying within Gilroy schools. Citing the California Healthy Kids Survey, the lawsuits note that 29% of ninth graders and 25% of eleventh graders in the district have experienced harassment and bullying. The legal actions aim to compel the district to implement new safety protocols, improve supervision, and provide staff training to prevent future incidents. Attorney Mark Boskovich emphasized that the lawsuits seek systemic change to ensure a safer learning environment for all students.

Additionally, the lawsuits reference a “Gilroy Fights” Instagram page, publicly accessible since at least December 2022, which features videos of fights occurring on district campuses—further evidence of the ongoing safety issues.

The complaint detailed how Edelman, then a teacher and counselor at the prestigious Lowell High School, began “grooming” the student under the pretense of academic mentorship. Edelman offered rides home, bought meals and gifts, and presented himself as a trusted adult invested in Doe’s success. According to the lawsuit, school officials ignored warning signs and failed to intervene, allowing Edelman to abuse the student repeatedly on campus, including in his office and classroom.

During the litigation, it emerged that another student had reported being sexually assaulted by a different counselor during the same school year, with Edelman allegedly helping to cover up that incident. Despite reports from students and parents, school officials did not take appropriate action. Attorney Lauren Cerri, representing John Doe, stated, “School officials admitted that they felt there was no reason to supervise any of the counselors more closely. Had they done so, most likely Edelman’s abuse of my client would have been detected and stopped”.

John Doe did not disclose the abuse until 2008, when he began seeking therapy to address its impact. “Given the effect this has had on my life, I wish I could go back in time and have forced the school district to prevent my abuse from happening in the first place,” Doe said in a statement.

Edelman continued to work for SFUSD after his time at Lowell, teaching at the Academy of Arts and Sciences until his resignation in September 2013. In 2014, Edelman was arrested in a sting operation by Mountain View police, who posed as a 17-year-old boy online.

This settlement comes amid broader scrutiny of SFUSD’s handling of sexual abuse cases. Earlier last year, attorney Lauren Cerri settled two additional sexual abuse cases against the District for $4.5 million, involving former George Washington High School athletic director Lawrence Young-Yet Chan.

Attorney Cerri emphasized the importance of accountability: “We hope that by bringing attention to the harm suffered years ago by victims of childhood sexual abuse, school districts throughout California will recognize the life-long harm they inflict when they choose to protect educators and the district’s reputation over the safety of students”.

John Doe echoed this sentiment, expressing disappointment that the district relies on liability insurance to resolve such cases rather than focusing on prevention. Still, he voiced hope, inspired by current Lowell students who have spoken out and organized for change, including #MeToo walkouts. “Their activism shows the power of collective action to demand accountability and work toward a safer environment for everyone. Thank you for your voices. We were never alone,” Doe said.

More on this development at:

SFUSD reaches $1.5M settlement in sex abuse lawsuit involving former counselor

The lawsuit accuses Castilleja School of negligent supervision, negligent misrepresentation, and inadequate training. It alleges that the school did not properly investigate or report prior complaints about the inappropriate behavior of tutor Mark Hodes.

According to the complaint, Castilleja School was aware of Hodes’ inappropriate behavior as early as 1992-1993. The school was reportedly on notice that Hodes engaged in highly inappropriate grooming behavior with minor female students, creating a risk of sexual assault.

Attorney Lauren Cerri is asking those with information about Hodes or any sexual misconduct incidents at Castilleja to call her office at 408-289-1417.

The lawsuit further claims that at least one Castilleja employee continued to recommend Hodes as a tutor and allowed him unsupervised access to the campus, despite him not being an employee. The school allegedly chose not to take any further actions to prevent his abuse of students.

Three former students, identified as Jane Does, have come forward with allegations:

• Jane Doe 1 claims abuse during the 2012-2013 school year while a middle school student.
• Jane Doe 2 alleges abuse both on campus and at Hodes’ home from 2012-2016 while a high school student.
• Jane Doe 3 reports sexual assault from 2007-2011 while a high school student.

The lawsuit argues that the abuse of these students could have been prevented if the school had prioritized student safety over its reputation.

This case underscores the critical importance of rigorous oversight and prompt action in educational institutions to protect vulnerable students. It highlights the need for schools to thoroughly investigate and report any suspicions of inappropriate behavior, prioritizing student safety above all else.

The lawsuit also raises questions about the responsibility of schools in vetting and monitoring non-employees who have access to students, as well as the potential long-term consequences of failing to address early warning signs of predatory behavior.

In 1997, Hodes was allegedly removed from Palo Alto High School’s campus due to sexual abuse of a student. In August 2020, he was arrested on a warrant for nine felony counts of lewd acts with a minor aged 14 or 15. Since then, he has been charged with 55 counts of lewd and lascivious acts with children, and a total of 17 girls have come forward to share their experiences.

More on this lawsuit:

Lawsuit: Former students allege Castilleja School failed to protect them from abusive tutor Palo Alto Girls’ School Sued for Covering Up Sexual Abuse by Math Tutor Castilleja sued over sexual abuse claims

A lawsuit filed in Santa Clara County Superior Court has brought to light serious allegations of negligence against Trumpet Behavioral Health, LLC and its parent company, BlueSprig. The case, filed by the law firm of Cerri, Boskovich & Allard, centers on the alleged sexual abuse of an 11-year-old autistic girl by a behavioral therapist during home-based therapy sessions. Trumpet Behavioral Health, LLC is a provider of Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) therapy for children, teens, and young adults with autism and intellectual disabilities. The company offers both home-based and center-based services across multiple states, including California. In late 2023, Trumpet was acquired by BlueSprig, another ABA therapy provider. The lawsuit states that the parents of the autistic child had been using Trumpet Behavioral Health’s services since 2017. In 2020, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the therapy sessions transitioned to a home-based format. The alleged abuse occurred in March 2024, perpetrated by therapist Alejandro Nunez during one of these home sessions. According to the legal filing, the abuse came to light when a plumber and his assistant witnessed Nunez inappropriately touching the child. After being informed, the child’s father set up a laptop to record the remainder of the therapy session, which allegedly captured three instances of inappropriate touching. Attorney Mark Boskovich, representing the family, emphasized the responsibility of companies providing in-home counseling services to children with intellectual disabilities. He stated, “Any company that provides in-home counseling services to children has an obligation to monitor that therapist during counseling sessions given that these children have intellectual disabilities that make them vulnerable to sexual abuse”. The lawsuit alleges that Trumpet Behavioral Health and BlueSprig failed in their duty to properly supervise Nunez, leaving him unsupervised with a vulnerable child. Following the discovery of the alleged abuse, San Jose Police were called to the scene. After reviewing the video evidence, Nunez was arrested. Alarmingly, this is not the first such incident associated with Trumpet Behavioral Health. The lawsuit mentions a prior case in Modesto, California, where another Trumpet behavioral therapist was arrested for allegedly sexually assaulting an intellectually disabled minor during a counseling session. This case highlights a broader, deeply concerning issue: the increased vulnerability of individuals with autism and other disabilities to physical and sexual abuse. Statistics from the Federal Bureau of Justice paint a stark picture:

• People with disabilities are at least 2.5 times more likely to be victims of violent crimes compared to the general population.
• Unpublished Justice Department statistics, as reported by National Public Radio, suggest that individuals with intellectual disabilities are seven times more likely to experience sexual assault than their non-disabled peers.

These alarming figures underscore the critical importance of robust safeguards and vigilant supervision in care settings for individuals with disabilities. This lawsuit serves as a sobering reminder of the vulnerabilities faced by individuals with autism and other intellectual disabilities. It raises important questions about the responsibility of care providers to ensure the safety of their clients, especially in home-based settings. As the legal process unfolds, it may lead to broader discussions about improving protection measures for vulnerable individuals receiving therapeutic services.

More on this lawsuit at:

Parent sues behavioral health organization, alleging negligence allowing sexual abuse of minor in San Jose BlueSprig Faces Negligence Lawsuit Over Child Sexual Assault Case

The settlement also resolves three additional lawsuits brought by two former Tamalpais High School students and a private tennis player who received lessons from Burgos at the school. One of the victims, identified as John Doe, will receive $4.5 million for abuse that began during the 1999-2000 school year, when Burgos was still a probationary employee without tenure protections. Doe testified that a school administrator witnessed Burgos sexually abusing him but failed to intervene or report the incident, instead making a joke and walking away.

“None of these men should have ever been abused,” said attorney Mark Boskovich, who represented the victims. “The district’s failure to act enabled and emboldened Burgos to continue his predatory behavior.”

Two other victims, identified as Doe 2 and Doe 3, alleged they were sexually assaulted by Burgos during the 2000-2001 school year under the pretense of “body fat tests.” Both men will receive $750,000 each as part of the settlement (Marin County Superior Court, Case No. CIV2204358).

“Thank you for all you have done for me, I will appreciate it for the rest of my life. You both put on an amazing trial and I know doing so required not only tremendous skill, but most of all, intense preparation and hard work. Holding those accountable who were responsible for my abuse has both empowered me and helped me heal.” A.H.

Burgos’ abuse often involved taking students into private settings under false pretenses, such as conducting body fat tests or fitness evaluations. Instead of performing legitimate tests in public areas, Burgos would isolate students in his office, have them lie on a massage table, remove their clothing, and then sexually assault them.

“The district’s failure to protect these students is indefensible,” said attorney Robert Allard. “This case serves as a stark reminder that safeguarding students must always take precedence over protecting teachers or coaches.”

The lawsuits also highlight the devastating and long-lasting effects of sexual abuse on survivors. Many victims testified about years of trauma, including struggles with substance abuse, damaged relationships, and feelings of shame and low self-esteem. “These men have endured life-altering pain,” Boskovich said. “Some contemplated suicide; others turned to drugs and alcohol to cope with their suffering.”

Normandie Burgos was finally brought to justice in 2019 when he was criminally convicted of 60 counts of sexual abuse involving multiple victims. He is currently serving a 255-year prison sentence.

This settlement underscores systemic failures within the school district to address early warning signs about Burgos’ behavior and prevent further harm to students. It also serves as a call for stronger protections and accountability measures in schools statewide to ensure student safety.

Steven Myers, who was hired by SCCS in 1981 as principal of Branciforte Junior High School, was also the founder of the “Traveling School Summer Program,” a pilot initiative later integrated into the district’s curriculum. This program targeted students with behavioral and academic challenges, many from unstable home environments. Both plaintiffs, identified in court documents as John Roe 3 and John Roe 4, participated in the program during the late 1980s and early 1990s. They alleged that Myers used his position to create an environment that enabled years of abuse.

The lawsuit revealed disturbing details about Myers’ conduct during the Traveling School program. He reportedly incorporated massages into the curriculum, exclusively targeting boys, often shirtless, and required students to massage him in return. On designated “Body Theme Days,” students were instructed to wear minimal clothing; Myers himself wore a tight Speedo and required boys to do the same. Additionally, Myers allegedly provided drugs to students and invited them to his home for activities such as hot tub sessions. The lack of oversight allowed him to share rooms or beds with students during trips.

One of the plaintiffs, John Roe 3, expressed hope that this settlement would serve as a wake-up call for SCCS to implement stronger protections for students. “This lawsuit could have been easily avoided if Santa Cruz City Schools had safety measures and oversight in place,” he stated. John Roe 4 shared how the abuse profoundly impacted his life, leading to struggles with boundaries and substance abuse as he coped with decades of secrecy. “When secrets are told, they lose their power,” he said, emphasizing the importance of speaking out for healing and closure.

Attorney Lauren Cerri highlighted the significance of this case despite the decades that have passed since the abuse occurred. “The fact that it happened so long ago doesn’t mean it’s OK or that they can get away with it,” she said. She hopes this resolution provides validation and closure for her clients while underscoring systemic failures in safeguarding children.

Testimonies during the case revealed that no policies or training existed at the time regarding Myers’ behavior or interactions with students. Leaders of the Traveling School admitted there was no district oversight during trips or at Myers’ home visits with students. Additionally, SCCS employees reportedly ignored warnings about Myers’ inappropriate behavior dating back to his tenure at Crittenden Middle School in Mountain View during the 1970s.

Myers resigned from SCCS in 1991 amid growing concerns but has never faced criminal prosecution due to statutes of limitations. His teaching credentials were later revoked in California and Colorado for sexual misconduct. Attorney Lauren Cerri is also representing two former Crittenden Middle School students who allege similar abuse by Myers in the 1970s; their case is set to go to trial next summer.

This settlement underscores both past institutional failures and the ongoing need for robust safeguards to protect students from abuse within educational systems.

For more on this case, please read:

Santa Cruz Lookout San Jose Mercury News