Academy Disputes Lynch Suit
The Academy has asserted in court documents that it fired former employee Hal Lynch III because a student alleged Lynch had known and failed to report sexual misconduct against the student by Lynch’s then-partner. Lynch, who is gay, claimed he was let go due to his sexual orientation.
PEA maintained that Lynch was guilty of “willful blindness” to “unspeakable acts” committed by former faculty member Lane Bateman, Lynch’s former long-term partner. Bateman was convicted in 1992 of possession and interstate transportation of child pornography. In 2016, a former student reported to PEA that he had engaged in sexual relations with Bateman while still a minor.
“Unfortunately, the Academy seems to be damned if the retired Dean knew and damned if he didn’t,” Lindemann said.
Attorneys Debra Ford and Samuel Maxwell from Jackson Lewis P.C submitted the Academy’s response to Rockingham County Superior Court.
The school asserts in its defendant’s answer that it conducted an “independent investigation” after the 2016 report. The inquiry, according to the Academy, included interviews, a review of materials gathered over a 20 year period and an assessment of credibility, after which investigators determined that Lynch “was either aware of, or willfully blind to, sexual misconduct perpetuated by Bateman against at least two students during Bateman’s teaching career, as well as Bateman’s involvement in buying and selling large amounts of child pornography.”
Lynch and his lawyer, John Sherman, could not be reached for comment. Assistant Principal Karen Lassey and PEA’s General Counsel Holly Barcroft declined to comment on the case. Former Dean Rick Mahoney also declined to comment.
The Academy put Lynch, a former associate director of Admissions, director of Fisher Theater and an openly gay member of the administrative faculty, on paid leave in November 2016. His employment was terminated in March 2017. Lynch filed a lawsuit against the Academy in September.
In the suit, Lynch claimed that he had no knowledge of Bateman’s involvement in criminal activities prior to the latter’s arrest in 1992. He claims he was singled out for punishment because of his sexual orientation and involvement in the criminal proceedings that followed the arrest.
PEA denied any connection between Lynch’s sexual orientation or participation in the 1992 criminal proceedings and his dismissal. According to the court filing, PEA began offering its employees same-sex partner benefits in 2003, which Lynch took advantage of. On March 31, 2006, PEA also made a donation to the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network on Lynch’s behalf, commemorating the 25th anniversary of his appointment.
The Academy’s response highlighted details in Lynch’s relationship with Bateman that the former did not note in his lawsuit, including how Bateman “recruited Lynch to be hired at PEA.” Though Lynch claimed the two never “resided together,” they lived in the same building from 1983-1985 and then again from 1991-1992, just before Bateman’s arrest.
The relationship allegedly continued after Bateman was convicted of criminal offenses. In 1993, PEA said Lynch attempted to obtain a mortgage from the school for the purpose of building a residence off-campus for him and Bateman upon the latter’s release from prison.
PEA denied any knowledge of Bateman’s sexual misconduct against students prior to the 2016 report, either before Bateman’s arrest or during the 1992 criminal proceedings. It also denied Lynch’s claims that an Exeter Fire Department member, former Dean Rick Mahoney and another faculty member found a student lying naked in Bateman’s bed and notified PEA about the incident.
An Exonian article published on Jan. 19, 1993, however, reported that then-Principal Kendra Stearns O’Donnell, on Jan. 5, gave an Assembly address about “new evidence” in the Bateman case. According to Exonian staff writer Debbie Bander, O’Donnell “informed the student body that Mr. Bateman did have sexual relations with a student of the Academy at some point in the 1980s.”
Even so, in the response filed with the court, PEA “expressly denies that it knew or should have known that [Mahoney and the faculty member] had direct personal knowledge of Bateman’s conduct” and further denied that the employees had such knowledge.
These claims echo Lassey’s previous comments about investigations into Mahoney’s role, which PEA conducted after the 2016 report and which failed to find “sufficient evidence that he had any knowledge of sexual misconduct.”
PEA further denied having interviewed Lynch during the criminal prosecution of 1992 about whether he knew of Bateman’s alleged relationship with the male student.
Former Assistant School minister Carl Lindemann ’79 says that the school’s response suggests a new zero-tolerance policy applied retroactively to PEA employees “aware of, or willfully blind to sexual misconduct.” This, he suggested, would likely affect many prominent emeriti including past principals and trustees. “If there’s really such a policy, why haven’t they been subjected to it? Shouldn’t we expect to see their emeriti status revoked along with the diplomas of Trustees who apparently gave them a free pass?”
Lindemann also believes the Academy is caught in a Catch-22 over whether Mahoney knew about sexual misconduct on campus. “Unfortunately, the Academy seems to be damned if the retired Dean knew and damned if he didn’t,” Lindemann said.
“If [the Dean] knew, it would seem to validate a key claim in the lawsuit. If he didn’t, then it suggests that the Academy’s key witness, apparently the person who set Lynch’s dismissal into motion [in 2016], isn’t credible.”
While Lindemann expressed disappointment in the Academy’s limited disclosures from recent investigations, he sees this may soon change. “Hopefully this suit will bring the transparency that Mr. Lynch seeks and that the entire Academy community deserves and has been denied,” he said.