Warning: This is coverage of a trial involving rape and sexual abuse.
Jane Doe et. al. v. Montgomery County Board of Education et. al. Montgomery County Circuit Court #482727V
This November 2023, civil trial in Montgomery County, Maryland was not covered by the media.
The public only learned about this trial when the November 17, 2023, jury verdict and award was reported by FOX5.
The Parents' Coalition is providing the public with rough notes from the civil trial Jane Doe et. al. v. Montgomery County Board of Education in Montgomery County Circuit Court.
The trial was before Montgomery County Circuit Court Judge Kevin Hessler.
This is not a transcript. Please consult the Montgomery County Circuit Court for a copy of the transcript of what transpired at trial.
Additional postings of notes from this trial can be found at this link.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The following are notes from the Opening Statements to the jury given by the attorneys for the plaintiff and defendants.
Plaintiff's Opening Statement (Jane Doe et. al.)
This case involves incidents at Gaithersburg High School. The plaintiff was a 14 year old freshman at the time of the incidents.
This case involves the standard of care of the school system and the school system's accountability for what happened.
In January and February of 2018, the plaintiff was 14 years old and was sexually assaulted in the school building.
The plaintiff moved to Gaithersburg and tried out for the wrestling team. He made the JV team.
Coaches Eric Britton and Daniel Moore ran the JV and Varsity practices together.
Plaintiff's first week of practice, someone started holding him down and slapping him on the rear end. Plaintiff began changing in the bathroom to avoid the locker room, but still had to be in the locker room to use his locker. Someone would turn out lights and scream "initiation time." Other wrestlers would rub their rear ends on plaintiff's face and body. Then, other wrestlers would hold plaintiff down and put their finger through his compression shorts into his rectum.
On Thursday, February 8, 2018, wrestlers posted on team snapchat that they were going to sexually assault plaintiff later that day. A wrestler posted on snapchat that they were going to "stick his sausage in [plaintiff] and make [plaintiff] lick the chocolate off of it." Plaintiff was very concerned when he saw this snapchat post.
This was not new behavior for Wrestler#1 (W1). W1 was well known for behavior issues. W1 got a pass because he was one of the stars of the team.
One incident on February 8, 2018, was caught on film by another wrestler.
Video of assault was posted on social media where it went viral throughout school.
Coach Moore was in locker room when plaintiff was jumped by other wrestlers in what is termed a dog pile. Plaintiff was held down, shorts pulled down and other wrestlers rubbed their buttocks on plaintiff and punched his testicles, then a finger in his buttocks. Plaintiff said "stop" four times and then said I quit.
Coach Moore told police he heard plaintiff say stop, stop, stop, no, but didn't bother to check and ignored situation.
Later plaintiff posted, I'm sick of you raping me, rubbing asses, punching my balls, slapping my ass." To which W1 responded, we all went through this, why do you have to be such a bitch.
Where were the adults? That is the question in this case.
MCPS violated their own rules, violated the athletic handbook by not providing effective locker room supervision at all times.
Plaintiff is a courageous young man. He knows this has to be brought to justice as the Montgomery County Board of Education has never accepted responsibility.
This trial is a time for accountability. Reject anything that says that is OK because it is boys.
MCPS had a duty to supervise. A verdict for the plaintiff is a verdict for school safety.
Defendants' Opening Statement (Board of Education, Coach Britton and Coach Moore)
Defendants' attorney started out by stating, "Mr. Maloney [plaintiff's attorney] is a good storyteller.
The wrestlers are not defendants. They are suing dedicated public servants."
Coach Britton is a MCPS special education teacher who enjoys wresting and mentoring students. He has two children.
Coach Moore is young, fit, would actually wrestle with the kids. He has a day job and has a brand-new baby.
There is only one issue in this trial. Whether or not the supervision of these students was negligent.
The plaintiff describes the incidents very differently. Listen to the testimony.
Supervision is like parenting.
MCPS has a policy that "athletes must be supervised at all times." What does that mean? It's broad. [MCPS Athletic Director] Sullivan will tell you it is defined broadly for a reason because it depends on circumstances. Middle school students need different supervision than high school students. High school students can't be watched all the time. Not possible. Just like parenting.
Coaches in high school are not required and not expected to watch athletes change. They are expected to be generally around, in the vicinity. Athletes should know where to find them. Coaches do not stay in locker rooms.
Wrestlers were properly supervised at all times.
Only person who has a different version of this is the plaintiff and "he has everything to gain."
Wrestling team has a zero-tolerance policy. Coaches had no access to snapchat.
February 8th: 3 locations - locker room, hallway, wrestling room
Video of incident: 4 wrestlers mooned plaintiff. It is a 22 second video. They were having fun. Everything is in video. They were mooning each other. Plaintiff is the only one who describes it that way.
The Board of Education recognizes this was bad. All of the wrestlers were suspended, prohibited from rest of season.
Before February 8th, wrestlers would tap each other on the butt. Coach would say stop. Call parents. There had never been a sexual assault in the wrestling team - ever.
What happened was bad, it was unexpected. It hadn't happened before.
All plaintiff's friends went to Quince Orchard High School. Plaintiff had applied for a change of school assignment and been denied. He got a change of school assignment the day after the incident, and he was happy about the transfer.
The plaintiff went to therapy after the incident, graduated on time, is thriving, therapy helped him.
The school system is not the insurer of safety of students but has to act as a reasonably prudent parent would act.
Was the school system reasonably supervising these spaces - locker room, wresting room - the answer is yes.
We were not negligent in supervision.
Next post: Plaintiff's first witness, Detective Amber R.
