Dear Prudence: I don't even know how to title this

[minoanmiss]

Content advisory: sexual assault.

We are relatively new to our town and working on making friends. Our son has made friends with a very sweet boy at school whose parents invited us over for lunch while the kids had a play date. During the lunch, as we are connecting on things we have in common, it comes out that my husband (we can call him John) and the friend’s dad (let’s call him Thomas), went to the same small college, but Thomas graduated more than 18 years before John. My husband says, “You must know our most infamous alum!” and names a guy that had graduated around the same time as Thomas, and Thomas says, “Actually, that is me!” In my husband’s defense, Thomas goes by a nickname and has a very common last name; minus his middle name, you wouldn’t actually connect him with his VERY famous family and name. In any case, Thomas is exceptionally well-known: He had a very famous rape trial many years ago where he was found not guilty.

I happen to work on issues related to sexual assault for my career and know a bunch about his trial, which was pre–rape shield laws (so they put the victim on trial), and they excluded evidence of multiple other rape claims on a technicality that would not hold up today. I did a little Googling and found that Thomas had been accused of sexual assault again later in life, and his wife defended him by saying, “These cockroaches will never die.” Although the encounter was very awkward (my husband made an excuse to leave as soon as he realized who Thomas was), we have already been invited to other things with this couple and will inevitably be around these people on the regular. I do not believe in holding a child accountable for the crimes of their parents, but I am wondering if I have a moral obligation to share this information with anyone else? I would not want a female-identified babysitter, nanny, or any other young woman to be around this man. I am horrified that a woman would call victims of assault “cockroaches,” especially when I spend much of my day trying to teach people why false accusations of rape, assault, and sexual harassment are not a thing and why. What do we do here? Cut off contact? Limit contact? Warn other parents? I don’t want kids to feel ostracized because of their parents, and at the same time I feel gross being around them and making small talk.

Dear Morally Conflicted Mom,

Cutting off contact is the wise thing to do here. I know you’re sympathetic to Thomas’ son, but I just don’t see how any continued relationship with the family is going to be tenable. Moreover, if your son and Thomas’ son keep growing their friendship, it stands to reason that they’d want to spend time at Thomas’ house, which I presume is a big no-go for you. While there will surely be times this family is unavoidable given the way school works, you don’t have to associate with them.

Telling others is a slippery slope, mostly because it will likely draw you into a situation that you don’t want to be in. And others might see your actions as gossip or even slander rather than what you intend them to be. If you encounter someone who is planning to babysit for them, for instance, I think it’s fair to give a heads-up, since the information is all Google-able. But you want to be careful not to go on a crusade.

Comments

[melannen]

Is it just me who's tempted to suggest the exact opposite advice? LW you don't need to cut off their son, but you do need to cut off the parents, and you don't need to be coy about why. It's not that unusual as a kid to have friends whose houses you never visit but who can come to yours, and if Thomas won't allow that, well, that one's not on you.

Meanwhile, Thomas doesn't seem to be treating his past as a horrible unspeakable secret, so I vote you just carry on and pretend it's the interesting anecdote about a shared past that your husband thought it was going to be when he brought it up. You turn down an invite, someone asks why, you say, "Funny story, actually, my husband went to the same college as Thomas, and I guess he knows too many details about Thomas's time there to just brush it off. What details? You know, the big rape case he was involved in, he wasn't convicted but it was pretty obvious if you were following the story, and there's all those later allegations--" or "With the work I do, it just doesn't seem right to be seen around an accused multiple rapist - oh you didn't know? Yeah it was all over the media when it happened, I don't think it was ever a secret--"

If he does try to make drama about it, you go, oh, ooopsie, I didn't realize it was some big secret, after all you were happy to chat about it with my husband! And in the press!

[castiron]

Yeah, I wouldn't cut off the son or discourage the children's friendship either. Youngest has a couple friends where the visiting goes one way for various reasons; there's lots of reasons why that might be the case, especially in the Covid era.

(And who knows? If both families are still in the area in ten years, the friend might need an adult to talk to about the old article he found about his dad, and "John" might be exactly the right person.)

[lemonsharks]

Welp, with the subject identified as (probably?) being a kennedy, I’d do so far as to completely cut off logistical support for the son’s friendship as well and hoping son loses interspersed.

Go with some subjective reason like “they just rub me the wrong way” or “we met and I didn’t like them,” if someone asks.

[conuly]

Well, Thomas and his wife clearly feel no shame about any of this, so I don't see what the problem is with telling the world.

[cimorene]

Agreed. Not to mention that personally, if one person made safer choices to not let their kid go to his house or not babysit or whatever and another person said I was mean for gossiping behind his back, I think I'd be satisfied with that outcome. Clearly when you weigh these two things against each other, the risk to other women is greater than the risk to you of being socially awkward??? And also I like full-body cringed at the recommendation to cut off the contact with the kids. We're talking kids small enough to still have playdates here! There's no good script for that, man. Plus, if your kid is old enough to know what sex is and be taught about consent and talking to trusted adults, I think they're old enough to be told that you don't think his house is safe but you don't mind the kid coming over.

[shirou]

I would be concerned about an actual slander charge if Thomas and his wife discover LW spreading the word. However unjust the trial, Thomas was found not guilty and remains not guilty in the eyes of the law.

[minoanmiss]

Yeah, me too. And the columnist's advice didn't include anything about threading that needle.

[melannen]

Truth is a defense against slander so if you just state that the trial happened and what you know about the trial, you're fine.

And it sounds like one of those cases where just describing what happened at the trial makes him look like, at minimum, a slut-shaming rape-apologist asshole.

[jadelennox]

Yeah, normally, but Thomas is a Kennedy who got off because his senator uncle went to bat for him, so I still wouldn't get involved, if I were LW. I don't think he still lives in Massachusetts but I wouldn't go up against that family for all the bootleg gin in Joseph P.'s basement.

[minoanmiss]

You figured out who this is about and it's a KENNEDY. JFC.

[cereta]

I pegged it pretty much right away, but that and the Tyson case were my first real exposure to how rape cases, and rape victims, are talked about, and how fucked up the system is, and into the intersectons of race and class with rape (and then into a whole lot of U.S. history), so it still looms kind of large in my mind. I suspect that's true for a number of women my age.

[melannen]

OH! I would not have guessed that, because somehow I took the read from the letter that the case happened at the college (It's not like there's a shortage of rape cases at colleges where the wealthy rapist gets off.) but yeah that sure does line up.

[jadelennox]

Dude, he is guilty as sin, but do not I repeat DO NOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES publicly tell other parents about the rapey past of a Kennedy.

But yeah, I remember that trial. I was young enough that I didn't really know about Chappaquidick and I didn't understand why TK was defending a guy who had obviously done the rape, wasn't he a good man, after all? Lol, amirite.

No I'm serious don't go up against the Kennedys, they will fuck you up. Just extract yourself.

[julian]

Holy shit that's not what I was expecting. But wow, yes, extract.

[jadelennox]

Oh my fucking god, just found this in an soft-touch profile of his defense attorney, from 1995:

"I'd thought blacks would be our best jurors," says Black, "because they admired the Kennedys. But a poll showed us that women over 40 who liked George Bush were most critical of women like Bowman, who drink at a bar until 3 a.m. and go home with a man they just met."

[laurajv]

the kennedys are probably slightly less dangerous these days, but...yeah

[sporky_rat]

My great grandfather kicked one of them out of his bootlegging/rum running area once. (As a family, to this day, we have very little sense of self-preservation.)

[ambyr]

If people have correctly identified the rapist in question, he lives in my city. Dear LW: I will personally introduce you to better people if it would help.