The mother of the Virginia high school student who sexually molested teenage girls not once, but twice, in two different high schools, granted an interview with the Daily Mail. The male student and mother have yet to be publicly identified, but the boy was wearing a skirt when he sexually assaulted a 15-year-old girl in a non-binary bathroom in a proud “woke” school district.
Defending her son relentlessly, the mother chastised the victim saying, “you’re fifteen. You can reasonably defend yourself.” She also said her son simply is a 15-year-old boy who “wanted sex.” A local judge found him guilty of the sexual assault that occurred in May.
“He’s a 15-year-old boy that wanted to have sex in the bathroom, with somebody that was willing,” said the mother. “And they’re twisting this just enough to make it a political hot button issue.” As for wearing a skirt during the assault, the woman did admit her son is “deeply troubled” but was only wearing a skirt that particular day because he has an “androgynous style.”
The mother continued, “he would wear a skirt one day and then the next day, he would wear jeans and a T-shirt, a polo, or hoodie. He was trying to find himself and that involved all kinds of styles. I believe he was doing it because it gave him the attention he desperately needed and sought.”
Despite two alleged attacks by her son, the mother claims it was all a misunderstanding. At least the first assault. According to how the son described the scenario to her, his mother said the two had met earlier in the day because the female “wasn’t feeling well that day….he was worried about her, asked her how she was feeling, touched her forehead, brought water for her.”
She says the two students discussed having sex later on in the day. “He’d mentioned something about hooking up with her, said they’d discussed it that day and that she was wishy-washy, was like, ‘Yeah, maybe, I still don’t feel well, we’ll see.” She said her son told her later in the day when the girl was feeling “much better” they met to have sex.
The mother claims that the rape was an “accident” because he did not mean to insert himself into her anus. The mother then brought into question the female student’s account of the attack. “If I was in a position where I was about to be raped, I would be screaming, kicking, everything…you’re 15. You can reasonably defend yourself. You’re not just going to sit there and take it. And so, because there wasn’t a presence of a fight, he felt it was okay to keep going.”
BREAKING: Trump ordered to pay over $350M, barred from operating his business in NY in civil fraud case ruling
Former President Donald Trump and his business empire faced a significant setback as a New York judge ruled against them in a civil fraud case brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James. The 92-page ruling, handed down by Judge Arthur Engoron, barred Trump from operating his business in New York for three years and imposed over $350 million in damages.
The case, which unfolded over months of trial proceedings, stemmed from allegations that Trump inflated his assets and engaged in fraudulent practices. Engoron’s ruling cited a litany of charges, including persistent fraud, falsifying records, issuing false financial statements, and conspiracy to commit fraud.
Moreover, the judge imposed restrictions on key figures within the Trump Organization, including Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump, barring them from serving in certain corporate roles in New York for a specified period.
Engoron’s scathing assessment of Trump’s testimony during the trial further undermined the former president’s credibility. The judge criticized Trump for evasive responses and irrelevant digressions, highlighting the detrimental effect on his credibility.
In response to the ruling, Trump’s attorney, Christopher Kise, lambasted the court’s decision, alleging political bias and a disregard for established legal principles. Kise argued that the evidence presented during the trial failed to support the allegations of fraud and emphasized Trump’s substantial net worth.
Kise’s assertions were echoed by Alina Habba, another attorney representing Trump, who denounced the verdict as a “manifest injustice” resulting from a politically motivated witch hunt.
Throughout the proceedings, Trump consistently dismissed the trial as politically motivated, accusing both Engoron and James of partisan bias. His legal team also criticized the absence of a jury in the trial, questioning the fairness of the proceedings.
Attorney General Letitia James, who spearheaded the lawsuit against Trump and his organization, portrayed the ruling as a victory for accountability and transparency in business practices. The lawsuit alleged fraudulent conduct and sought substantial financial penalties, a portion of which would contribute to the state treasury.
The fallout from the case extends beyond Trump and his business interests, with implications for the broader business community and the rule of law. The contentious nature of the trial and its outcome underscored deep divisions and raised questions about the integrity of the legal system.
Trump vows to appeal the decision.
National Security7 days ago
Authorities catch Afghan national on terror watchlist at southern CA border
Israel6 days ago
Iran-backed Houthis recruiting ‘thousands’ of children after Oct 7 massacre
China7 days ago
Hunter associate: China successfully attempted to ‘infiltrate and compromise’ Biden family and Obama White House
Immigration5 days ago
Feds bust ‘sophisticated’ trucking operation smuggling drugs in fire extinguishers after two year operation