Edward Flickinger

Edward Flickinger

 Let me know if there are any specific features/items you would like me to add to our website.  If I cannot do it I will seek help and try to figure it out.  May have to call on some of you IT type guys!  flick

Edward Flickinger

Recent Deerfield announcement regarding inappropriate sexual activity between faculty and student in the 1980s.  

Sad but maybe not totally unexpected in an environment such as Deerifleld.  Several comments have been sent directly to me which I have not shared to date.  If I received permission from the originator of the e-mails I will post them on this "Message Forum" option @ our class website.  Please locate it about 1/2 way down the options on the left side of the home page.

If you have a comment please post so that it maybe be shared with other members of our class.  This will keep the comments from going public beyond our class.

Thanks, Flick

Douglas Spragg

Based on the premise that a former student has made an accusation about an inappropriate sexual contact by a former faculty member, it was entirely appropriate for DA to solicit feedback from alumni and initiate an investigation.  However, it was NOT appropriate in my view to name any specific individual until they had completed an investigation.  By naming an individual, they have put that person in a very bad position, and if the accusation(s) later turns out to be without merit, DA has opened themselves up to potential litigation with huge potential financial consequences.

Don't expect to be attend the reunion or sending any more $$$ DA's way.

Edward Flickinger

I believe that the initial communication from Head of School Curtis with the greater Deerfield family noted that there had been a direct and personal admission by the faculty member involved to inappropriate sexual activity with a  Deerfield student in the 1980s.

To quote the communication:

..." has admitted sexual contact with a student, and we are now conducting a detailed investigation of" faculty involved...

The futher on-going investigation was to determine if this inappropriate activity was limited to a single incident.  

egf

Douglas Spragg

Need to read some of the follow ups.  The named individual apparently did not admit to having sexual contact.  He did admit to giving back rubs, and although that may sound a bit strange, arguably does not constitute sexual contact.

Douglas Spragg

Have noted the Hindle Vimeo video on the home page of this site has been pulled.  I guess the DA lawyers were behind that.

Don (Preston) Goodheart

This is what I wrote to the Head of School, given that I understood that the accused perpetrator had admitted sexual contact. If that is incorrect I agree that the Academy should not have mentioned him by name.

"Dear Mrs. Curtis,

I was a both and student of Mr. Hindle in his classroom and a resident in the dorm where he was the master in 1964-1965. I am distressed to learn of these allegations and his admission. 

Let me say that during all the time that I knew him I never saw any indication of inappropriate contact. He was a gentleman and a scholar as well as a great teacher!

I know the Academy must pursue this matter, but I truly hope that this was an isolated incident and that we can remember Mr. Hindle more for the good he did than for any inappropriate contact he had with a student.

Thank you,

Donald Preston Goodheart '65"

Don (Preston) Goodheart

Where are the "follow-ups" that Doug Spragg mentioned?

Don (Preston) Goodheart

I found some follow-up on the Boston Herald web site, and yes, he does deny "sexual contact" unless a back rub is sexual contact. 

Douglas Spragg

Preston - sorry Donald but I knew you as Preston before I knew you as Donald, I think I am sensing a guilty until proven innocent syndrome in all this and I think it reflects very poorly on the Academy which I USED to have a high regard for.  I can tell you, as I have already told Magarita Curtis, that  DA needs to get its facts straight before it mentions specific names.    I suspect my name is mud because I steadfastly refuse to fall in line with the party line.  But I really don't care.  Deerfield 2013 bears little (if any) resemblance to the Deerfield I knew.  In fact almost no resemblence.  I will never give another dime to Deerfield Academy.

Don (Preston) Goodheart

Yes, old habits are hard to break and I am beyond worrying about Preston or Donald. I actually changed my name in college partly because it is my first name and Preston made me a real target for teasing at Deerfield. But I am fine now with people calling me Preston even though only gradeschool and Deerfield people know me that way. Preston actually comes from the old English meaning "Priest's town," and since I became a priest it almost seems prophetic. I agree the school jumped way ahead by releasing Peter Hindle's name before the accusations were proven. Even more, it appears someone either misunderstood him or twisted his words into a confession. If the accusations prove to be baseless I hope his name can be cleared. I truly admired him and learned a lot from him.

Steve Schackne

A 30 year old charge comes to light now. What's the point?  The retired faculty member is what?--80 years old?

I repeat what's the point? If the investigation comes up with nothing, a retired faculty member's reputation (and by extension for Mr. Hindle, his whole life) has been ruined. If the investigation turns up a case of sexual misconduct, what happens next?  The retired faculty member goes to jail? He's fined? He has to attend behavior modification classes. Where is this leading us?  To closure for the alleged victim?  To a criminal court?  To a civil court?  To an out-of-court settlement?

I am not trying to belittle the seriousness of the charge, but I don't see where this is going, and I don't see a satisfactory ending for the school or any of the parties involved, now that it has been made public.

Edward Flickinger

Understand everyone's concern.  Would simply caution that where there is smoke there often is fire.  Doubt that head-of-school whould have made the response that she did without appropriate legal counsel.  She's a very thoughtful person with the best intereest of DA at heart.  Deerfield already has potential liability issues from student making the claim and any others who also may have been involved.  Also the head-of-school had to know that the involved faculty member was among the most highly respected and beloved among all Deerfield faculty members going back more than 4 decades.  His contribution were exemplary and nearly limitless.

A back rub is never appropriate nor should be condoned between any faculty member and any student unless it is a muscle massage performed by a qualified trainer in the "training room" for medical/sports-related indications.  Must say I never saw a back massage performed by our trainer during my years @ DA.  Lots of deep-heat Rx though.  We were blessed to have Chuck Demers on site.  Not aware that DA had any other professionally treained masseurs on campus. Also not sure that DA would have made the response it did if only a back rub had been admitted to.

Think the academy was in a double bind situation.  Damned if they didn't do something...and equally damned if they did.  I would guess (not always a good thing to do) that it thought it had very reliable indications.  In this day and age, any cover-up is far worse that the event itself.

I am not trying to defend Deerfield or just speak the "party line". ..just calling it as I see it.   Also have the utmost repect and concern for the faculty member sited.  The truth will come out and if DA acted inappropriately/prematurely then it will pay a big price as suggested and appropriately so.

Steve Schackne

These charges can be serious, but there is a huge slippery slope here--what is sexual misconduct?  If I touch a woman on the shoulder and she didn't want me to do that, it could be construed as sexual misconduct. If I a throw a woman to the ground and sexually assault her, that is also sexual misconduct, but they are not really the same. One is a serious crime, one isn't. One is rather clearcut, the other (like hate speech) is rather grey and nebulous. One should be legally prosecuted, the other shouldn't be, but still could be used for political coercion and personal destruction.

My senior year at Deerfield, I was assaulted by a master...no, not sexual assault; it was physical battery predicated by anger at my misbehavior. I was helped to the infirmary by a couple of classmates and I spent an evening there with a concussion. My father came up and faced the master; the Quid, of course, was called in; it was all very sticky because my Dad went to Deerfield and knew both the master and Mr. Boyden quite well. When I got back to Plunkett dorm, a couple of teachers came by trying to convince me (and my family) not to press charges against the master. What they didn't know was that I never planned to seek a legal remedy. I was wrong; i was where I shouldn't have been; he was wrong, he lost his temper and struck me. We both moved on--I never saw that regrettable incident as a pretext for personally destroying the man.

However, we never really know in today's society...was a wrong committed?  Or is someone trying to personally or politically destroy someone. Was it sexual misconduct? Or was it simply a friendly tap on the back? Was it hate speech? Or was it an honest expression of opinion.

Dan says "the incident" involved a leg rub, and the student seems to be walking away from the charge. But Mr. Hindle's name has already been thrown out there, he has been slandered. In a few months, we should ask ourselves, was it worth all of the publicity and embrrassment for the school and the individuals involved?

Michael O'Connor

The problem is that we don't know anything.  Deerfield has just thrown Mr. Hindle's name out there, and that's about it. 

No accuser has been named.  (And, before seeing Dan Wroblkeski's post identifying him, I was left to deduce that the person making the charge would now be between 37 and 51 years old, and would have let more that two decades pass before bringing up this subject.)  Even given the idea of repressed memory, one has to think that this alumnus would not now be so psychologically vulnerable as to require annonymity. 

And what of the odd wording, that the former student "has confided in us"?  And what does "sexual contact" mean, exactly?  The current Deerfield administration has started this, with their very public declaration.  I think they owe everyone a much more complete, and very swift, explanation.  What are we to think, with so little to go on?

As a gay man myself, I'm aware that there are many issues here.  But it's difficult to make an informed opinion with virtually no information.

For myself, I've often said that, despite all the fictional renderings of all-boys prep schools as hotbeds of sexual activity, my year at Deerfield was just about the straightest of my life.    Maybe because nearly every minute of my time was scheduled, or because I was thoroughly exhausted from intense swim team practices.  Or maybe, given all the anti-gay societal pressure at the time, I just wasn't ready to deal with the idea.

I wasn't "out"  at  Deerfied, or even out to myself yet, though of course when one looks back on one's life with hindsight, you can piece together another, different, narrative than the one on the surface.

For instance, even though my "gaydar" wasn't yet fully developed, I recognized that Mr. Hindle was gay, as were at least two other prominent faculty members.  It seemed obvious, but no one ever mentioned it.  Not students, not faculty, not parents.  No one.  At least in my small sphere.  And so there was no discussion of the topic.

Looking back, I wonder what it must have been like for those men, living in a "Don't-Ask-Don't-Tell-To-The-Nth-Degree" kind of world.  A place where they couldn't acknowledge, in even the slightest way, who they really were.  Whereas any other master could say, during a lecture, "When I was motoring through Tuscany last summer with my wife.....",  these guys couldn't  make even the slightest reference to the real texture of their lives. And the three I'm thinking about were all "confirmed bachelors."  I'm not even going near the subject of teachers who should have been gay, but married women to preserve their position and their "respectability."  The situation must have taken a great toll on all those men.

Things are different today, thankfully.  I think I read that there is even a gay couple -- two guys --- who teach at Deerfield and preside over a dorm.  So what we're talking about is the past.  But a past whose discussion can stir up discomfort, even today.

One more reason I'm concerned with this issue:  During my senior year of public high school, the best teacher I had was fired and essentially run out of town for being gay.  (It wasn't the official reason given, but was definitely the underlying cause.)  That episode taught me two lessons:  1) Don't go into teaching; and 2) Get the hell out of town.  Fast.

Anyway, that's my view of the context of those times. 

As for the current situation, the accusation against Mr. Hindle --- whom I liked and enjoyed, as many others have said they did--- I just don't know.  We haven't been given enough information to form an opinion.  And I think the current Administration had better give us some information very soon.  It really isn't fair to toss Mr. Hindle's name into the public arena, before you have anything definite to say.

Michael O'Connor

Just finished clicking around the internet.  Found the blog of the person who accused Mr. Hindle (iancampbellhammon.blogspot.com). In Ian Hammon's latest entry (Friday Feb.1st at 4:24 p.m.) he totally recants his charge and apologizes.

This whole episode is very strange.  There could be more twists and turns to come. 

But if things continue to stand as they do now, Deerfield (and it's advisors) should expect to fork over huge monetary damages to Mr. Hindle.  He would deserve it.

Steve Schackne

I just got a letter from Deerfield today, signed by Margarita Curtis and Philip Greer; Many of you have received or will receive the letter. I feel it indirectly indicts and convicts Mr. Hindle. Given the latest developments, as outlined by Mike and Dan, I think we may be receiving another letter very soon.

Don (Preston) Goodheart

And it continues. Mr. Hindle is convicted by the Academy administration. They have appointed themselves judge and jury. What ever happended to innocent until provent guilty? And even worse to throw Bryce Lambert's name in there where he has no possible way to defend himself. Can't they at least let the dead rest in peace? Yes, perhaps damned if you do and damned if you don't, but to convict someone in a public forum such as the letter with such a wide distribution is truly troubling to me. In trying to side with potential victims, they have thrown out all the rights of the accused. Since the occasions are in the fairly distant past, they are subject to the "myth of repressed memory," so well proven by former Standford psychologist Elizabeth Loftus.

Douglas Spragg

I am still struggling with all of this too.  I never had Lambert in class, but I had Hindle for three years of mathematics during my time at Deerfield.  He was a perfect gentlemen, helpful and patient in the extreme, and is the best teacher I ever had in my entire academic career.  He is the principle reason I pursued a major in mathematics for my undergraduate degree and went ahead and got an advanced degree (Masters) in mathematics.  Of course I cannot speak to the issues that have been raised in the letters that the Academy have sent out to us.  I am not privy to who exactly has lodged the complaints and the precise nature of the alleged offenses.  I do find it a bit odd that the number of accusers is small - one or two and perhaps a third has recently surfaced.  I have the sense that if a person were inclined to be involved in this kind of behavior, they would have established a pattern of behavior that would result in a lot more victims than just one or two or three.  I just don't know what we are left at the end if this debacle.  Erasing these gentlemen from the historical legacy of the Academy (squash courts and schoolmaster chairs) does not erase their legacy for those of us that knew them.  The whole thing is very sad.  Don't know we go from here, but memories of Deerfield will never be the same for me again.

Steve Schackne

I just got Flick's email about the Boston paper article on Mr. Hindle...okay, I've weighed in on this before, and will be posting later...steve schackne

Douglas Spragg

I just read the article that was posted by Flick.  To put it in context, I (like all of you) attended the Academy in the sixties not the eighties, and I was a day student so I did not live on campus.  But to me, even setting aside the sexual allegations, this aricle certainly makes it appear that there was a pattern of misbehavior by both faculty and students that is surprising.  Faculty members driving misbehaving students out to remote locations and having them then find their way back?  Really?  Almost open use of alcohol and drugs in dormitories?  Really?  Is it likely that those activities were unique to Barton?  This article suggests a profoundly, pervasively unhealthy culture  If I recall, the reason Frank Boyden was forced to 'retire' revolved around the allegations that there was drug use on campus and it was being ignored by the administration.  Looks like succeeding administrations had similar or worse problems.  Should we infer that the systemic problems outlined in this article have been fixed or are still ongoing?  Maybe the Head of School would like to write us a letter about that.