Former Loudoun County Superintendent Found Guilty in Trans Rape Coverup Case
Loudoun County Superintendent Found Guilty of Retaliation Against Teacher in Sexual Assault Investigation
A jury consisting of six women and one man delivered a verdict on Friday, finding former Loudoun County Public Schools Superintendent Scott Ziegler guilty of using his position to retaliate against a teacher who cooperated with a grand jury investigating the mishandling of sexual assault cases in the district.
After a four-day trial and a day of deliberations, the jury concluded that Ziegler wrongfully terminated a teacher who had disclosed instances of sexual assault mishandling in her classroom to Virginia investigators. Ziegler was convicted of using his official position to retaliate against someone exercising their rights, while being acquitted of punishing someone for testifying to a jury, both of which are misdemeanors.
Ziegler could potentially face up to 12 months in jail, a $2,500 fine, or both. The sentencing is scheduled for January 4, 2024, as announced by Judge Douglas Fleming Jr. Upon hearing the verdict, former special education teacher Erin Brooks, the victim in this case, reacted emotionally by clasping her hands in front of her mouth.
According to prosecutors appointed by Attorney General Jason Miyares, a Republican, their investigation into the school district’s cover-up of a bathroom rape led them to speak with Brooks. During their conversation, Brooks disclosed another incident of sexual assault mishandling by school administrators. As a result, Ziegler fired Brooks for cooperating with the special grand jury.
Out of the 15,000 teachers in LCPS, Brooks was specifically targeted for termination by Ziegler during a school board meeting in June 2022, prosecutors claimed. Ziegler justified his decision by accusing Brooks of sharing private information with a conservative activist and the grand jury, as testified by school board member John Beatty.
However, Ziegler’s claim that Brooks had provided information to a conservative activist turned out to be false. Furthermore, it would be illegal to punish her for telling the truth to a jury she had been subpoenaed by, argued the prosecutors.
Retaliation and Cover-Up
During the trial, school board member Brenda Sheridan, a Democrat who chaired the board during the gender-fluid rape cover-up, was questioned under oath about Ziegler’s closed-door statements that amounted to a confession. Instead of denying Beatty’s version, Sheridan refused to answer, citing attorney-client privilege due to the presence of division attorney Robert Falconi in the room.
Ziegler did not take the stand to testify during the trial.
Falconi managed to dissuade the board from further questioning about Brooks that night by falsely claiming that she could simply appeal the decision.
LCPS, often through Falconi, repeatedly attacked, attempted to shut down, and obscured information from the special grand jury. This grand jury was convened following the Daily Wire’s October 2021 expose on a “genderfluid” rape cover-up, as promised by Republican Governor Glenn Youngkin.
The grand jury expressed their intention to indict Falconi for witness tampering, given his central role in the rape cover-up. However, they were unable to do so due to the absence of a witness tampering law in Virginia.
A Timeline of Retaliation
Prosecutors presented a compelling timeline of retaliation against Brooks, who was seeking intervention from administrators regarding a student with intellectual disabilities repeatedly sexually assaulting her and her teaching assistant, Laurie Vandermeulen. The student would make crude gestures with his tongue while grabbing their genitals dozens of times a day.
Administrators responded by providing the educators with a piece of cardboard called ”no-no hands” and suggesting they wear dog groomer aprons to “slow down penetration.”
Feeling helpless, Vandermeulen asked Ian Prior, a frequent speaker at school board meetings, to read a letter to the board, highlighting the sexual assaults occurring in their classroom and requesting assistance.
Vandermeulen also sent a record of the assaults to her personal Gmail account out of fear of a cover-up. Initially, Ziegler’s attorney tried to portray this action as ”smuggling” private information, but failed to demonstrate any policy violation by Vandermeulen.
On March 22, 2022, principal Diane Mackey provided Brooks with a positive evaluation. That same night, Prior delivered his speech to the school board, which did not disclose any identifying information about the student, teachers, or the school’s name. Prior was unaware of specific details about the student, and Vandermeulen had requested that no names be mentioned. He only mentioned that teachers had filed a Title IX complaint on a specific date, hoping the board would investigate.
After seeing Prior’s speech, Mackey transferred the student out of Brooks’ classroom the following day. However, Brooks became the target of hostility from school administrators.
Shortly after, Brooks requested a day off to testify before the grand jury. When Mackey demanded to see the subpoena, Ziegler inquired with HR about Brooks’ employment status, potentially making her an easy target for termination. Mackey discussed Brooks with Ziegler and falsely testified to the grand jury that she had not, later attributing it to a memory error. Mackey also discussed Brooks with Falconi, the attorney described by prosecutors as Ziegler’s “right-hand man.”
In May, Mackey wrote a negative evaluation and a letter recommending Brooks’ termination. Ziegler used this letter on the same day to justify firing her, suggesting that he had been waiting for it.
Prosecutors argued that the year-end evaluation of Brooks demonstrated that school officials retroactively fabricated allegations to justify Ziegler’s desire to terminate her. This was particularly significant considering Brooks’ outstanding record and her recognition as Special Ed Teacher of the Year the previous year.
The evaluation primarily focused on the student involved in the trial, accusing Brooks of failing to manage his behavior and implement the suggested “plans,” such as using the cardboard. Ziegler’s attorney insinuated that Brooks had caused the student to sexually assault her by frustrating him with the denial of an iPad.
However, the defense faced a timeline challenge with the year-end evaluation. The student never returned to Brooks’ classroom between her positive evaluation in March and the negative evaluation in May. The latter evaluation contained allegations regarding her handling of the student, which were absent from or contradicted by the earlier evaluation.
Prosecutor Brandon Wrobleski questioned the credibility of the defense’s argument, stating, “She made it up after the fact. Isn’t it brazen how she did this? ‘We can’t have more sexual assaults coming out. Anyone who brings sexual assaults to public attention is gone.’ That’s what happened here. Look at how well the family works together when a dissident speaks out. She goes from Teacher of the Year to fired.”
Ziegler’s attorney, Erin Harrigan, attempted to explain the discrepancy in her closing arguments. She claimed that Mackey had observed that the student did not assault his new teacher between the two evaluations, leading to the conclusion that Brooks and Vandermeulen must have been responsible for their own assaults.
Prosecutor Theo Stamos argued that the defense failed to provide a motive for Brooks and Vandermeulen to voluntarily subject themselves to sexual assault or deprive the student of an iPad communication device. In fact, Brooks was an advocate for communication aids for disabled students and even conducted training on the subject.
The defense’s evidence, suggesting that Brooks caused the assaults by not implementing administrators’ plans or denying the student an iPad, relied on brief observations from a few administrators who had spent only a few minutes in Brooks’ class. Their testimonies during the trial indicated that the defense had exaggerated or misrepresented their observations.
Harrigan emphasized in her closing arguments that the law regarding punishment for jury testimony focuses on punishing individuals for being absent. Ziegler was found not guilty of that charge, possibly because the jurors believed he retaliated against Brooks for her statements to the grand jury rather than for taking a day off work.
Upcoming Trial and Legal Challenges
Following his sentencing on January 4, Ziegler will face a separate trial on another misdemeanor charge. This charge stems from his false statement at a school board meeting, where he denied any sexual assaults occurring in LCPS restrooms. The statement was part of a larger speech denigrating concerned parents who were discussing a transgender policy. However, Ziegler was aware that a skirt-wearing boy had anally raped a ninth grader in the girls’ bathroom just weeks prior, as revealed in The Daily Wire’s 2021 story.
Harrigan intends to file a “somewhat legally complex” motion to set aside the jury’s verdict.
What evidence was presented during the trial that showed Ziegler’s targeting of Brooks for termination?
Oks during the trial. It all began in May 2021, when Brooks reported the mishandling of a sexual assault case in her classroom to Virginia investigators. This report ultimately led to the grand jury investigation into the district.
In February 2022, Brooks testified before the grand jury about the mishandling of sexual assault cases. Soon after, she was served with a termination notice by Ziegler. The termination was justified by Ziegler based on allegations that Brooks shared private information with a conservative activist, which were later proven to be false.
During the trial, prosecutors presented evidence that Ziegler had targeted Brooks specifically for termination, out of the thousands of teachers in the district. They emphasized that his actions were a direct result of her cooperation with the grand jury and her dedication to revealing the mishandling of sexual assault cases. It was made clear that Ziegler used his position of power to retaliate against her and silence her.
The jury, after careful consideration and deliberations, found Ziegler guilty of using his official position to retaliate against Brooks. This verdict sends a strong message that retaliatory actions against whistleblowers and those seeking justice will not be tolerated.
In light of this conviction, it is important for the Loudoun County Public Schools to reevaluate their policies regarding retaliation and ensure that all employees feel safe and supported when reporting misconduct. Transparency and accountability are crucial in maintaining a safe and healthy learning environment for students.
The sentencing of Ziegler is scheduled for January 4, 2024. It is my hope that the court imposes an appropriate penalty that reflects the seriousness of his actions and serves as a deterrent for future misconduct.
The bravery displayed by Erin Brooks in coming forward and cooperating with the grand jury must be recognized and commended. It is individuals like her who shed light on important issues and pave the way for necessary changes to be made within our education system.
In conclusion, the guilty verdict against former Loudoun County Public Schools Superintendent Scott Ziegler for retaliation against a teacher who cooperated with a sexual assault investigation is a significant step towards justice. It is a reminder that no one is above the law, especially those in positions of power. The Loudoun County community must now focus on healing and ensuring the safety and well-being of its students.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
Now loading...