As I read the updates you’ve been adding, I appreciate your eye for detail and noting the discrepancies in the stories. I’m hunching that Jennings has a leaning towards ‘revising’ his story to fit, for lack of a better word, the ‘agenda’ du jour. It seems that the emphasis or tone of an article may be causing him to adjust the facts to fit the emphasis.

At one point it seems that ‘safe sex’ may have been the theme so he highlighted the condom advice; at another, his emphasis seems to be the tortured emotional state…taking Fleming/Brewster/Thompson’s comment of “I might as well be dead anyway” and ramping it up to ‘a suicidal youth’. This may also explain why, in some of his retellings he goes for further emphasis by attempting to allude to his own sense of oppression…not being ‘out’ to the students at large, etc. Another discrepancy is the ongoing one on one sessions he claims to have had speaking to the boy as opposed to that affirming smile they’d exchange as he saw the boy on campus. I’m growing more concerned about Jennings ‘adapting the truth’ to make a point than anything else.

I had missed the part about school policy forbidding the trips out of town…and the suggestion of likely substance abuse. These situations add more gravity to the original situation.

Since you’ve posted a number of threads on this topic I’m not sure where I read that ‘Brewster’ has come forward and claimed that he didn’t have sex with the guy. My first reaction is that he’s pulling a Clinton…that oral sex likely took place but that he hadn’t ‘gone all the way’ to intercourse.

At this point, I’m not sure if we’ll ever get to the simple truth of the situation. In one of the quotes, he mentions that he brought the matter up in the faculty lounge…and he does mention that fellow teacher who brought Brewster to him…it would be a good thing if one of these ‘witnesses’ would come forward and help flesh out the real story.

Finally, it’s just a hunch but Jennings seems to have a flair for the dramatic as is evidenced by the names he comes up with for the youth. Rather than a generic name like Tom, Dick, Harry, or Jim, he invents these soap-opera type handles: Brewster, Fleming, Thompson.

And many of us who are Jennings age more or less grew up with a lot of baggage, doubt and some fear. That we should attempt to lighten that load on the next generations of gay youth, but not at first be fully prepared to do so, is I believe understandable. To acknowledge those shortcomings as Jennings has done is commendable but does not disqualify him. If one cannot learn from our mistakes, then what human would ever be qualified?

Actually since this post is about Jennings – that’s kind of where I stayed. However, I highly doubt that this child’s parents or parents of one of his friends or another teacher or adult didn’t notice and try to step in. That is Brewster’s story. And so far I have not read much about him save what Jennings has told.

I am shocked that NO ONE was notified of his condition. NO ONE? Another secret the youth is carrying.

I think only Brewster and others who knew him at the time can comment on who tried to help him.

A close family friend’s daughter ran away from home. She looked very young for her age; no one asked her orientation; but plenty of people intervened to try to help. She often refused. When she finally asked for help, it was to someone she knew.

We have no idea how many people tried to intervene with Brewster, prior to him seeking out Kevin. It is naive to think that no one did.

That is the power and the responsibility of being chosen by someone in trouble, especially when the chosen person is in authority…they think you know the right thing to do…

And legally, by taking the position, you are promising when the time arises, you will do it.